Bolich (Thomas) v. State ( 2014 )

 4.160; Round Hill Gen. Imp. Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 637 P.2d 534(1981). A writ of prohibition serves to arrest "the proceedings of any . . .
board . . . exercising judicial functions, when such proceedings are without
or in excess of the jurisdiction of such . . . board." NRS 34.320. A writ of
mandamus and a writ of prohibition may issue only where there is no
plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330.
Petitions for extraordinary writs are addressed to the sound discretion of
the court. State ex rel. Dept Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 662 P.2d
1338 (1983). Based upon our review of the record on appeal, we conclude
that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the
petition.
First, the petition, which appellant acknowledged did not
challenge the validity of his judgment of conviction, was improperly filed
in the criminal case and should have been filed as a separate civil action.
Second, notwithstanding the improper filing of the petition in
the criminal case, appellant failed to demonstrate that any duty was
violated or that any actor exceeded their jurisdiction. While NRS
484C.410(1) provides that a person convicted of felony DUI must be
segregated from violent offenders and be assigned to a minimum security
facility or institution, this provision is qualified by the language "insofar
as practicable." The documentation provided by appellant shows that he
has been incarcerated in minimum security facilities but medical issues
and• disciplinary violations have caused him to be removed from the
minimum security facilities. Appellant is not entitled to the selection of a
minimum security facility, of his choosing and must meet all requirements
for any minimum security facility or institution.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A e
Third, any challenge to the computation of time served,
including the loss of credits as a result of prison disciplinary violations
must be raised in a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
See NRS 34.724(2)(c).
Fourth, any challenges to his medical treatment and the
conditions of his confinement are not appropriate in a petition for a writ of
mandamus or prohibition as there are other adequate remedies at law.
NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, District Judge
Thomas M. Bolich
Attorney General/Las Vegas
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) I947A ceo