IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

GARY E. MCKINLEY, No. 82175 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK, FILED Respondent, FEB 0 8 2021 and ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK OF SUPREME COURT BY C. •V ATTORNEY; HENDERSON POLICE ° OEPU1Y C.LIRIZ.1115- DEPARTMENT; AND THE STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION AND AMENDED PETITION This original pro se petition and amended petition for a writ of mandamus seek an order directing the real parties in interest to (1) comply with certain subpoenas and discovery requests, (2) allow and assist petitioner to electronically file documents and review discovery, (3) provide petitioner audio/video equipment to participate in district court hearings, and (4) permit petitioner to keep boxes of legal documents in his prison cell.

Petitioner has not provided this court with all of the exhibits or other 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).

Thus, we are not persuaded that petitioner has met his burden to show that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. See NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004)

-03(972. (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) (observing that "the issuance of a writ of mandamus or prohibition is purely discretionary with this coure). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition and amended petition DENIED.

, C.J.

Hardesty

--gwijteamiLtrig7/7 1/4.1L6/ 1) Parraguirre Silver

cc: Gary E. McKinley Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Attorney General/Las Vegas Henderson City Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREW COURT OF NEVADA

AIDE, (0) 1947A