WILLIAM CARL MISIEWICZ v. THE STATE OF NEVADA BOARD OF PAROLE COMMISSIONERS (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges the denial of parole on the basis that the parole board used incorrect information about petitioner's past employment history when denying parole.

Having considered the petition, the answer, and accompanying documentation, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Stiglich, C.J.

Cadish, J.

Herndon, J.