IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS, No. 81144 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILED CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JACQUELINE M. BLUTH, DISTRICT iMl 2 8 %fin JUDGE, E. 17 ..- CLER; OF ' BROM,/ OPREM COURT Respondents, BY DEPUi: CLERK and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This pro se filing, which we have construed as an original pretrial petition for a writ of mandamus, appears to seek reinstatement of petitioner's bail.

Problematically, petitioner has not provided this court with all of the exhibits or documentation that would support his claims for relief.

See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing the petitioner shall submit an appendix containing all documents "essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition"). Therefore, without deciding the merits of the claims raised, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRAP 21(b).

We reiterate that "[p]etitioned car/[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted." Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10) 1947A Furthermore, to the extent that petitioner has counsel, he must proceed by and through his counsel of record. Accordingly, we deny the petition.

It is so ORDERED.'

I A6-t J. ide4a1-0 , J.

Hardesty Stiglich

cc: Hon. Jacqueline M. Bluth, District Judge Raymond Tyrone Davis Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

1Petitioner's failure to provide timely proof of service of the petition constitutes an additional basis upon which to deny relief. NRAP 21(a)(1).

To the extent petitioner seeks relief from this requirement, we deny his request.