Sneed (Jamal) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (Nev. 2022)

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA JAMAL SNEED, No. 84507 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILE CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE TIERRA DANIELLE JONES, DISTRICT APR 2 8 2022 JUDGE, EUZABETH A. BROWN CLER.KF SUPREME COURT Respondents, BY qt DEPUTY CLERK and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest. 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 Kusstnan 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. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 19-17A 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.' Parraguirre , j. ,J Hardesty Stiglich cc: Hon. Tierra Danielle Jones, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk 'Petitioner's motion for stay filed April 6, 2022 is therefore denied as SUPREME COURT moot. OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 4634. 2

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA JAMAL SNEED, No. 84507 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILE CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE TIERRA DANIELLE JONES, DISTRICT APR 2 8 2022 JUDGE, EUZABETH A. BROWN CLER.KF SUPREME COURT Respondents, BY qt DEPUTY CLERK and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest. 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 Kusstnan 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. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 19-17A 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.' Parraguirre , j. ,J Hardesty Stiglich cc: Hon. Tierra Danielle Jones, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk 'Petitioner's motion for stay filed April 6, 2022 is therefore denied as SUPREME COURT moot. OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 4634. 2

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

JAMAL SNEED, No. 84507 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILE CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE TIERRA DANIELLE JONES, DISTRICT APR 2 8 2022 JUDGE, EUZABETH A. BROWN CLER.KF SUPREME COURT Respondents, BY qt DEPUTY CLERK and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

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 Kusstnan 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. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 19-17A 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.'

Parraguirre

, j. ,J Hardesty Stiglich

cc: Hon. Tierra Danielle Jones, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

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

OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 4634.