IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
STEVEN D. IRVIN, No. 69699
Petitioner,
vs.
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE FILE
OF NEVADA; JAMES WRIGHT,
DIRECTOR OF THE NEVADA
FEB 0 4 2016
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; TRACIE K. LtNDEMAN
CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
AND PATRICK SAUNDER, BY
DEPUTY CLERK
SUPERVISOR OF DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC SAFETY,
Respondents.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This pro se original petition for a writ of mandamus or
prohibition seeks relief from a decision of the Department of Public Safety
denying petitioner's request for reconsideration of his Tier-3 sex offender
designation. 1 Petitioner may seek review of the Department's decision by
filing a petition for judicial review in the appropriate district court. See
NRS 233B.130. Because petitioner therefore has an adequate remedy at
law, this court's intervention by extraordinary writ is not warranted. See
NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330: Kay v. Nunez, 122 Nev. 1100, 1104-05, 146 P.3d
'It appears that NRS 179D.700-.770 were applied in this matter
because their 2008 repeal as part of A.B. 579 had been the subject of
ongoing litigation and various injunctions precluding the State from
enforcing A.B. 579. The most recent injunction was imposed by this court
in Does 1-24 v. Eighth Judicial District Court, Docket No. 64890 (Order,
May 23, 2014) (extending injunction pending further order of this court).
That writ petition recently was resolved in the State's favor, but it appears
that the underlying litigation remains pending in the district court.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A 1(0 - 031tel
801, 805 (2006) (explaining that where the Legislature has created a right
to petition for judicial review of an administrative decision, such a petition
is an adequate and speedy legal remedy). We therefore
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Cherry
cc: Steven D. Irvin
Attorney General/Carson City
2