Guillen (Alberto) v. Dist. Ct. (State) ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
    ALBERTO JULIO GUILLEN,                                No. 69970
    Petitioner,
    vs.
    THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
    IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF
    WASHOE; AND THE HONORABLE                                   FILED
    SCOTT N. FREEMAN, DISTRICT                                  APR 1 4 2016
    JUDGE,
    TRACE K. LINDEMAN
    Respondents,                                           CLER.W SUPREME COURT
    and                                                    BY
    DEPUTY CLERK
    THE STATE OF NEVADA,
    Real Party in Interest.
    ORDER DENYING PETITION
    This original petition for a writ of certiorari challenges the
    district court's order affirming petitioner Alberto Guillen's misdemeanor
    convictions for assault, battery, and making a threatening telephone call.
    Guillen contends that NRS 51.035 is unconstitutional insofar as it permits
    a conviction solely on the basis of a victim's prior inconsistent statements
    without other corroborating evidence.
    A writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy, lying within
    the discretion of this court. Zamarripa v. First Judicial Dist. Court, 
    103 Nev. 638
    , 640, 
    747 P.2d 1386
    , 1387 (1987). The writ may be granted to
    review the constitutionality of a statute in appealing a decision of the
    justice court where an appellant was prosecuted under that statute and
    the district court has ruled on the constitutionality of that statute. NRS
    34.020(3). Guillen, however, has not challenged the constitutionality of
    the offense statutes under which he was prosecuted, but rather challenges
    the constitutionality of the evidence admitted against him.       See Glass v.
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    (0) 1947A
    i    - 117 3 4,
    Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 
    87 Nev. 321
    , 324, 
    486 P.2d 1180
    , 1182(1971)
    ("Certiorari, although available to test the constitutionality of a statute, is
    not available to decide a question of the admissibility of evidence."). As
    this claim does not fall within the narrow scope of NRS 34.020, we decline
    to exercise our discretion to issue a writ of certiorari.
    Having considered Guillen's petition and concluded that
    extraordinary relief is not warranted, we
    ORDER the petition DENIED.
    J.
    Douglas
    cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge
    Washoe County Public Defender
    Attorney General/Carson City
    Washoe County District Attorney
    Washoe District Court Clerk
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) 1947T
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 69970

Filed Date: 4/14/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021