Full Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA KEVIN JAMES O’GORMAN, No. 93353-COA Petitioner, vs. THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE AND THE HONORABLE BARRY L. BRESLOW, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest. ORDER DENYING PETITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges the district court’s partial dismissal of appellant’s postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Int’l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). A writ of prohibition arrests the proceedings of a tribunal that is acting in excess of, or without, jurisdiction. NRS 34.320. The decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief is within our sole discretion, and the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that such relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Having considered the petition and the supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has not carried his burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. In particular, we are not convinced that an appeal from a final order would not be an adequate and speedy remedy. See Int’l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558 (recognizing that “an appeal from [a] final judgment typically constitutes an adequate and speedy legal remedy”); NRAP 3A(b)(1) (regarding the appealability of final judgments). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED. Bulla, C.J. Gibbons, J. Westbrook, J. cc: Attorney General/Carson City Richard F. Cornell, P.C. Washoe County District Attorney Hon. Barry L. Breslow The Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, in and for the County of Washoe 2