SNEED v. The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest. (2022)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This petition for a writ of a mandamus challenges a district court order denying a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which petitioner alleged that a witness gave speculative testimony as to the value of allegedly stolen goods at the preliminary hearing, which was insufficient to support a charge of grand larceny.

We conclude that our intervention by extraordinary relief is not warranted because our review of pretrial probable cause determinations is generally disfavored, see Kussman v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 96 Nev. 544, 545-46, 612 P.2d 679, 680 (1980); see also Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (“Petitioners carry the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.”); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (providing that writ relief is purely discretionary). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   Petitioner's motion for stay filed April 6, 2022 is therefore denied as moot.