JESSICA BROWN v. THE STATE OF NEVADA (2024)

ORDER DENYING PETITIONS

Appellant has filed two pro se original petitions for a writ of mandamus. Having considered the petitions, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Additionally, we decline to intervene because petitioner failed to adequately state the issues, facts, and reasons why the writ should issue, including points and legal authorities, NRAP 21 (a)(3)(C)-(E), and because petitioner failed to submit an appendix for our review, NRAP 21(a)(4). NRS 34.160. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

Cadish, C.J.

Stiglich, J.

Herndon, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Petitioner has failed to provide proof of service of the petition on the appropriate parties, which is an additional reason to deny the petition. NRAP 21(a)(1).