CHARLES ANTHONY SKAGGS v. THE STATE OF NEVADA (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus seeks a writ directing the district court to schedule an evidentiary hearing and assign counsel so he can proceed with the litigation of his habeas corpus petition.

Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Moreover, we are confident that the district court will resolve all pending matters as expeditiously as its calendar permits. Therefore, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRAP 21(b). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Stiglich, C.J.

Cadish, J.

Herndon, J.