Villadelgado (Goderick) v. The Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
GODERICK VILLADELGADO, No. 85273
Petitioner,
vs.
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF OCT 06 2022
CLARK, ELIZABETH A. BROWN
CLERK 111F
1 REME COURT
Respondent. BY •
DEPUTrcLERK
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is an original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus
challenging the parole board's decision to deny parole.
Mandamus relief is an extraordinary remedy, and petitioners
bear the burden to show that such relief is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth
Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). In the
instant matter, petitioner has not demonstrated that extraordinary relief is
warranted, as the petition is not supported by any relevant documentation
and lacks critical information about petitioner's conviction, sentence, as
well as the parole board proceeding and determination. NRAP 21(a)(4)
(stating that it is the petitioner's obligation to provide an appendix that
includes all records that may be essential to understand the matters set
forth in the petition).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
" 47A
02 .2 -3)5S5-
Most importantly, the petition does not include the parole board
determination that petitioner challenges. NRAP 21(a)(4). Without this
crucial information, we cannot evaluate the petition.1 Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
, C.J.
Parrhguirre
J.
Hardesty
414(.4-.0 J.
Stiglich
cc: Goderick Villadelgado
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
'Petitioner has filed an erratum to the petition, which we have
SUPREME COURT considered together with the petition.
OF
NEVADA
••)) 7A