An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying petitioner's motion to preclude the State from seeking the death penalty or, alternatively, to stay the proceedings indefinitely. Petitioner argues that extraordinary relief is warranted because he is unable to conduct a constitutionally-sufficient mitigation investigation, as that investigation requires the defense team to travel to Jiquilpan, Michoacan—an exceptionally violent and dangerous region in Mexico—and therefore the State should be precluded from seeking the death penalty. Alternatively, he argues that the proceedings must be stayed until the defense team can safely conduct its mitigation investigation in Mexico. Because petitioner has an adequate remedy at law should he be convicted and death imposed, we decline to intervene in this matter. See NRS 34.170 (providing that writ of mandamus will not issue if petitioner has plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in ordinary course of law); Poulos v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 98 Nev. 453, 455, 652 P.2d 1177, 1178 (1982) (observing that mandamus is extraordinary remedy, and it is within this court's discretion to determine if petition will be considered). Accordingly, we
Alternatively, petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition. Because the district court had jurisdiction to consider petitioner's motion, prohibition is not appropriate.
ORDER the petition DENIED.
cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge
Special Public Defender
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk