BORDEN v. The Honorable Scott N. Freeman, District Judge, Real Party in Interest. (2020)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This is an original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus wherein petitioner contends he is being held in prison illegally and the Nevada Department of Corrections is not providing necessary medications to petitioner.

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”).

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.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). To the extent petitioner requests assistance from this court regarding the difficulties he is experiencing effectuating service, we decline to do so because it would be improper for us to assist petitioner. To the extent petitioner complains that the district court has not yet acted upon the petition for a writ of habeas corpus that petitioner claims he filed below, we are confident that the district court will resolve all pending matters as expeditiously as its calendar permits.