BLANDINO v. The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest. (2021)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF

This emergency pro se petition for extraordinary relief seeks a writ of mandamus or habeas corpus or other relief so as to allow petitioner, who is on house arrest pending a criminal trial, to visit his son in California. Petitioner has also filed an emergency motion for relief regarding his pending motion to disqualify the district judge, asking that this court order a judge from another district to hear the case against him.

This is the second writ petition seeking substantially similar relief that petitioner has filed with this court. See Blandino v. Sheriff, Docket No. 82502 (Order Denying Petition for Extraordinary Relief, March 5, 2021). Nothing asserted in the current petition demonstrates changed circumstances that would now warrant extraordinary writ relief. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (explaining that petitioner bears the burden to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted); Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981) (noting that the decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief lies within the discretion of this court); see also Valdez-Jimenez v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 155, 161, 460 P.3d 976, 984 (2020) (recognizing that the district court's imposition of reasonable conditions on bail is a discretionary act). According to the district court docket entries submitted with petitioner's motion, the district court has previously denied several of petitioner's motions to disqualify and is scheduled to hear petitioner's current motions to disqualify soon. Nothing prevents petitioner meanwhile from filing a motion for relief in the district court. As petitioner has not demonstrated that our extraordinary intervention is warranted, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of this order, petitioner's emergency motion is denied as moot.