Clausen v. Dist. Ct. (City of Las Vegas) ( 2015 )

 Appellate Procedure in determining the procedures for prosecuting a
misdemeanor appeal. Finally, Clausen seeks an order referring Judge
Bare to the judicial discipline commission.
We have reviewed the documents submitted in this matter,
and without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised therein, we
decline to exercise original jurisdiction in this matter. See NRS 34.160;
NRS 34.170; NRS 34.320; NRS 34.330; NRS 34.020. It does not appear
from the documents before this court that a written order has been
entered regarding the motion to dismiss complaint and the basis for the
district court's decision is unclear. Thus, we cannot say that the district
court erred in denying the motion. 2 Although Clausen is correct that NRS
189.030 requires the lower court to transmit the transcripts, NRS 189.030
does not address the costs of the transcripts. The costs of the transcripts
may be assessed to a nonindigent appellant. See NRS 4.410(2) (providing
that the fees for transcripts and copies of proceedings in the justice courts
must be paid by the party ordering them); NRS 5.073(1) (providing that
the practice and proceedings of the municipal courts conform, as nearly as
practicable, to the practice and proceedings in the justice courts); Braham
v. Fourth Judicial Dist. Court, 103 Nev. 644, 647, 747 P.2d 1390, 1392
(1987) (holding that "when a justice's court decision is appealed, the
justice of the peace sends the case to the district court within ten days and
2 Itdoes not appear from this court's review of the documents
submitted that Clausen's motion to dismiss the complaint raised a
jurisdictional claim; rather Clausen appears to have challenged an alleged
pleading defect.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
0) 194Th c(rao
v.44441/4se. , -
;
costs of transmission can properly be assessed to the non-indigent
appellant"). Nothing precludes the district court from looking to the
NRAP for guidance in facilitating the processing of misdemeanor appeals.
Finally, Clausen's arguments regarding Judge Bare are inappropriately
raised in a petition for extraordinary relief in this court, see NRS 1.4655(1)
(providing that the Commission may begin an inquiry based upon a
complaint), and appear to be made with the intent to harass and vex the
judge as there does not appear to be any basis in fact for the challenges to
the judge's mental faculties. Clausen is cautioned that he may be
sanctioned in the future if he makes accusations of this nature that do not
have any supporting facts or if he raises claims for an improper purpose.
Petitioner Kim Blandino
It is not entirely clear from the pleadings before this court if
Blandino is asserting the same claims for relief as Clausen as the petition
does not adequately distinguish the arguments applicable to each
petitioner. To the extent that Blandino is raising the same claims for
relief as Clausen, we decline to exercise original jurisdiction for the same
reasons set forth above with the exception of the claim relating to NRS
189.070 and any claims regarding transcripts. See NRS 34.160; NRS
34.170; NRS 34.320; NRS 34.330; NRS 34.020. Regarding NRS 189.070, it
does not appear that Blandino's challenge is ripe as the documents before
this court do not indicate that he has filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint or has been denied consideration of the motion and his appeal
remains pending before Judge Miley. We cannot evaluate any claims
relating to transcripts as Blandino has failed to provide any documents
supporting this claim. Blandino is further cautioned that he may be
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e
sanctioned in the future if he makes accusations of the type raised in this
petition that do not have any supporting facts or if he raises claims for an
improper purpose. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED. 3
Le4-4P"-i , C.J.
Hardest
J.
Gibbons
J.
cc: Hon. Robert Bare, District Judge
Hon. Stefany Miley, District Judge
Don Clausen
Kim Blandino
Las Vegas City Attorney/Criminal Division
Eighth District Court Clerk
3 Wedecline to consider and reject petitioners' claims on behalf of
individuals who have not signed or submitted petitions to this court
themselves.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
4
(0) 1947A 4E94