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

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus and supplemental pleadings. We have considered the petition on file herein, and we are not satisfied that this court’s intervention by way of an extraordinary writ is warranted. See Poulos v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 98 Nev. 453, 455, 652 P.2d 1177, 1178 (1982) (recognizing that it is within the discretion of this court to determine if a petition will be considered). A writ of prohibition is not available because the district court had jurisdiction over the criminal case and the defendants. See NRS 34.320; Goicoechea v. Fourth Judicial Dist. Court, 96 Nev. 287, 289, 607 P.2d 1140, 1141 (1980) (holding that a writ of prohibition “will not issue if the court sought to be restrained had jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter under consideration”). Further, petitioners have not demonstrated that the district court acted arbitrarily or capriciously in denying the pretrial petition and supplemental pleadings. NRS 34.160; State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Armstrong), 127 Nev. 927, 931-32, 267 P.3d 777, 780 (2011) (recognizing that an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion is one that is contrary to the evidence or established rules of law). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.