THEODORE STEVENS v. MICHAEL MEE (2025)

ORDER DENYING MANDAMUS PETITION

This is an original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus asking this court to compel petitioner's formerly retained counsel in docket no. 87904 to quote certain language from a custodial interrogation for the record in that appeal.

In the underlying case, petitioner was convicted after a five-day jury trial in 2007 of first-degree murder and sentenced to serve a prison term of life without the possibility of parole. We note that in docket no. 87904, a pending appeal from the district court's denial of petitioner's motion to correct an illegal sentence, this court granted both counsel's motion to withdraw and petitioner's motion to remove counsel. Stevens v. State, Docket No. 87904 (Order Granting Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, Feb. 7, 2025).

Petitioner has not provided this court with any documentation or exhibits in support of his petition and necessary for this court's consideration of the petition. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing that petitioners must submit an appendix containing all documents “essential to understand[ing] the matters set forth in the petition”). Petitioner bears the burden of showing that extraordinary relief is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). We conclude that petitioner has failed to demonstrate our intervention by extraordinary writ is warranted. Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 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). Therefore, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRAP 21(b).

Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Herndon, C.J.

Parraguirre, J.

Stiglich, J.