IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

PETER JASON HELFRICH, No. 70521 Petitioner, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILED Respondent. SEP 1 6 2016 ciar CI K. LINDEMAN g SUP - EME CO BY a.

CF-Il DEP CLERK ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION This is an original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition arising from a proceeding to terminate petitioner's parental rights.

Petitioner argues that respondent is attempting to defraud the district court by filing a petition to terminate his parental rights even though the related juvenile dependency proceeding has not been finally resolved. Having considered the petition, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is warranted. See NRS 128.020 (setting forth the district court's jurisdiction in proceedings to terminate parental rights); In re Parental Rights as to A.G., 129 Nev. 125, 131-33, 295 P.3d 589, 593-94 (2013) (describing the relationship between juvenile dependency proceedings and actions to terminate parental rights); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (stating that petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted). Moreover, petitioner can appeal if his parental rights are terminated. See NEAP 3A(b)(1) (allowing an appeal from a final judgment); Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (providing that an appeal is generally considered an SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 0147A e adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief). Accordingly, we decline to intervene in this matter and we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (stating that a petition for extraordinary writ relief is purely discretionary with this court).

It is so ORDERED.

,

Parraguirre

J.

Hardesty

J.

Pickering

cc: Peter Jason Helfrich Attorney General/Carson City Nye County Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (C) I94Th yea