MONROE v. The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest. (2020)

Supreme Court of Nevada.

Daimon MONROE, Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Eric Johnson, District Judge, Respondents, The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest.

No. 81048

Decided: May 07, 2020

Daimon Monroe Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition appears to allege that the State failed to produce material evidence—specifically, two search warrants.

Problematically, petitioner has not provided this court with all of the exhibits or documentation that would support his claims for relief. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing the petitioner shall submit an appendix containing all documents “essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition”). Therefore, without deciding the merits of the claims raised, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRAP 21(b).

We reiterate that “[p]etitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.” Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network