IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
BAYZLE MORGAN, No. 70655
Petitioner,
vs.
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF
FILED
CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JUN 2 7 2016
RICHARD SCOTTI, DISTRICT JUDGE, TFMCIE K. LINDEMAN
Respondents, SLE
BY
and DEPUrf-CLIRK
THE STATE OF NEVADA,
Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or,
alternatively, prohibition challenging a district court order denying a
motion to continue the trial in the underlying proceedings, which is
scheduled to begin on Monday, June 27, 2016. Petitioner has also filed a
motion for stay, 1 and real party in interest has filed an opposition. Having
considered the documents and arguments presented in this matter, we
conclude that our extraordinary intervention is not warranted. Pan v.
1 -Wenote that petitioner's motion was denominated an "emergency,"
but counsel 'failed to comply with the requirements set foiith in NRAP
27(e), which governs such motions.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A
Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED. 2
Douglas
0-kutrave-
Cherry
Giflb on s
cc: Hon. Richard Scotti, District Judge
The Law Office of Daniel M. Bunin
Dayvid J. Figler
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
2 The motion for stay is denied as moot.
2