ACTION BAIL BONDS v. The State of Nevada; and Alfredo Arteaga Chavez, Real Parties in Interest. (2024)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying petitioner Action Bail Bond (ABB)’s motion to exonerate a bail bond. Having considered the petition and the supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. 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, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to grant relief).

ABB has failed to establish that the district court arbitrarily or capriciously abused its discretion in entering its bail forfeiture judgment. As ABB concedes, the decision to grant, exonerate, or discharge a bond rests with the district court's discretion. State v. Am. Bankers Ins. Co., 106 Nev. 880, 883, 802 P.2d 1276, 1278 (1990). Traditional mandamus relief does not lie where a discretionary lower court decision results from a mere error in judgment; instead, mandamus is available only where the law is overridden or misapplied, or when the judgment exercised is manifestly unreasonable or the result of partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill will. Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 681, 476 P.3d 1194, 1197 (2020). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.