Daniels (Aaron) v. Dist. Ct. (State) ( 2013 )

 second trial when an appellant court reverses a conviction due to an error
in the proceedings that led to the conviction. Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S.
33, 38 (1988); United States v. Tateo, 377 U.S. 463, 465 (1964); United
States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662, 671-72 (1896).
Our order resolving petitioner's direct appeal concluded that
the murder conviction must be reversed due to a trial error: The jury was
erroneously instructed on one of the State's theories of criminal liability
and therefore the jury's general verdict could not stand. Daniels v. State,
Docket No. 44071 (Order Affirming in Part, Reversing in Part, and
Remanding, November 29, 2006). Because our order did not expressly or
implicitly acquit petitioner of the murder charge, the district court did not
manifestly abuse its discretion, exercise its discretion in an arbitrary or
capricious manner, or act without or in excess of its jurisdiction by
denying petitioner's motion to dismiss the criminal information. See NRS
34.160; NRS 34.320; International Game Tech. v. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. 132,
142, 127 P.3d 1088, 1096 (2006); see also Glover v. Dist. Ct., 125 Nev. 691,
701, 220 P.3d 684, 692 (2009) (a writ of prohibition will issue to preclude a
retrial that would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.'
Gibbons
Saitta
'In light of this order, we deny Daniels' motion for a stay of the
proceedings.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A
2
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Gabriel L. Grasso, P.C.
Oronoz & Ericsson
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A
3