Opinion
No. 80109
01-24-2020
Bret BLACK, Jr., Petitioner, v. The FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF STOREY; and the Honorable James E. Wilson, District Judge, Respondents, and Anne M. Langer, Storey County District Attorney, Real Party in Interest.
Law Office of David R. Houston Law Offices of Kenneth E. Lyon, III Attorney General/Carson City Storey County District Attorney
Law Office of David R. Houston
Law Offices of Kenneth E. Lyon, III
Attorney General/Carson City
Storey County District Attorney
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This petition for a writ of mandamus challenges the district court’s determination to conduct a comprehensive evidentiary hearing, including facts relating to the underlying criminal case, to determine whether petitioner should be placed in a forensic facility. We decline to exercise original jurisdiction in this matter. NRS 34.160 ; NRS 34.320 ; see also State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Armstrong), 127 Nev. 927, 931, 267 P.3d 777, 779-80 (2011) (defining an arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion and determining that "the decision to entertain an extraordinary writ petition lies within our discretion"); Round Hill Gen . Imp. Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981) (recognizing that mandamus relief may be warranted where district court’s ruling was a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion); Goicoechea v. Fourth Judicial Dist. Court , 96 Nev. 287, 289, 607 P.2d 1140, 1141 (1980) ("A writ of prohibition ... will not issue if the court sought to be restrained had jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter under consideration."). Accordingly, we
Petitioner was charged with murder but found incompetent to stand trial with no substantial probability that he would attain competency in the forseeable future. Consequently, the criminal charges were dismissed pursuant to NRS 178.425(5), and the State filed a motion to commit petitioner pursuant to NRS 178.461.
The Honorable Michael Douglas, Senior Justice, participated in the decision of this matter under a general order of assignment.
--------