ORDER DENYING MANDAMUS PETITION
This is an original pro se petiton for a writ of mandamus challenging the district courts vexatious-litigant determination and the constitutionality of Senate Bill 182 (1951). In the underlying case, petitioner was convicted in 1995, pursuant to a jury verdict, of burglary, three counts of sexual assault with the use of a deadly weapon, and robbery with the use of a deadly weapon, and sentenced to serve consecutive prison terms totaling 70 years to life in the aggregate.
Having considered the petition and documents submitted by petitioner, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing that such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). As petitioner has failed to demonstrate that our intervention by extraordinary writ is warranted, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRAP 21(b). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Stiglich, J.
Herndon, J.
Parraguirre, J.