HARNDEN v. The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest. (2024)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a pretrial writ of habeas corpus that concluded petitioner's argument that the indictment alleged insufficient facts for the grand jury to find probable cause as to two counts in the indictment lacked merit.

Having considered the petition, we conclude that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is not warranted. See NRS 34.160; Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 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 Jud. Dist. Ct., 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 entertain a writ petition). The right to an appeal generally precludes writ relief. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. And this court generally declines review of “pretrial challenges to the sufficiency of an indictment.” Ostman v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 563, 565, 816 P.2d 458, 459 (1991). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED