Document Type
Case Summary
Publication Date
12-19-2024
Case Synopsis
The Court affirmed the district courts’ denial of Arinza Smith’s petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that his claim regarding the revised method for determining good time credits under Senate Bill (S.B.) 413 was a challenge to the computation of time served, which must be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to NRS Chapter 34. The Court also further clarified that S.B. 413’s provisions for determining good time credit calculations do not take effect until July 1, 2025, and are not in effect for the relief sought. Smith has an adequate remedy through a habeas petition, not a writ of mandamus which was inappropriate for this claim.
Recommended Citation
Pope, Ayanna, "Smith (Arinza) v. State [State of Nevada], 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Dec. 19, 2024)" (2024). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1740.
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/nvscs/1740