MADISON v. Clark County District Attorney, Real Party in Interest. (2021)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is a pro se original writ petition seeking to compel the Clark County District Attorney to prosecute case no. 19F22082A.

The decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief lies within the discretion of this court. Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev, 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). A writ of mandamus is available only to compel the performance of a legally required act or to cure an arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion. Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). It is petitioner s burden to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Here, petitioner has not shown that the Clark County District Attorney has failed to perform a legally required act or has arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion.

Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED