State v. Dist. Ct. (Maddox) ( 2014 )

 NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124
Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). "An arbitrary or capricious
exercise of discretion is one 'founded on prejudice or preference rather
than on reason,' (defining 'arbitrary), or "contrary to the evidence or
established rules of law" (defining 'capricious). State v. Eighth Judicial
Dist. Court, Nev. „ 267 P.3d 777, 780 (2011) (quoting Black's
Law Dictionary 119, 239 (9th ed. 2009)). And, "WTI the context of a writ
petition, this court gives deference to the district court's findings of fact."
Williams v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, Nev. „ 262 P.3d 360,
365 (2011). It is within this court's sole discretion to determine if a writ
petition will be considered. Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev.
674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Petitioner bears 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).
Having considered the petition and the supplement to the
petition, we conclude that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is
not warranted. See NRS 34.160; Pan, 120 Nev. at 229, 88 P.3d at 844; see
also NRAP 21(b). The district court's written findings of fact and
conclusions of law reflect the exercise of discretion, not its abuse. While
we are sensitive to the time pressures under which the parties have
proceeded, we note that petitioner failed to provide this court with an
appendix supporting the factual assertions made in its writ petition,
NRAP 21(a)(4), and petitioner failed to cite to any evidence that the
district court acted arbitrarily or capriciously. Because petitioner has
...continued
prohibition is available to arrest proceedings of a district court when such
proceedings are in excess of the district court's jurisdiction).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that extraordinary writ relief is
warranted here, we
ORDER the petition DENIED. 2
J.
Pafraguirre Saitta
cc: Hon. Frank P. Sullivan, District Judge, Family Court Division
Clark County District Attorney
Clark County District Attorney/Juvenile Division
William L. Wolfbrandt, Jr.
Lisa M. Kent
Eighth District Court Clerk
2 In light of this order, we deny petitioner's motion to file a
supplement to its stay motion, or in the alternative, to file a response to
the real parties in interest's oppositions to the stay.
This court entered a temporary stay of the child's release to real
party in interest Carnell Duhon, which expires by its own terms at noon
on Monday, July 28, 2014. Accordingly, no further action is necessary by
this court.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) I947A