MIDDLETON v. STEVENS (2020)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

In this original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, petitioner appears to seek a writ directing the Henderson Municipal Court to rule on the petition for a writ of habeas corpus he alleges he filed below.

Problematically, petitioner has not provided this court with exhibits or other 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); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (“Petitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.”). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   Petitioner's failure to provide timely proof of service of the petition constitutes an additional basis upon which to deny relief. NRAP 21(a)(1).