IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

No. 83515 

FILED 

APR 2 9 2022 

ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERISV‘

TDREUE COURT 

BY • 

DEPUTY CL (5-4-FIRM( 

LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 

DEPARTMENT, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF 

CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE 

ERIKA D. BALLOU, DISTRICT JUDGE, 

Respondents, 

and 

TERRENIE D. MCDOWELL, 

Real Party in Interest. 

ORDER DENYING PETITION 

This is an original writ petition for a writ of mandamus or, in 

the alternative, prohibition challenging an order granting a return of 

property motion in a criminal case. After engaging in a discussion with an 

undercover officer at the airport, real party in interest Terrenie D. 

McDowell was arrested and charged with pandering.2During the arrest, 

petitioner the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, seized 

approximately $12,000 in cash from McDowell. After McDowell pleaded 

guilty to attempted pandering, he moved for the return of the money. Before 

the district court resolved that motion, LVMPD filed a civil forfeiture action 

as to the money. The district court granted McDowell's motion despite the 

'Pursuant to NRAP 3401), we have determined that oral argument 

is not warranted in this matter. 

2See NRS 201.300(1) (providing that pandering occurs when a person, 

without physical threat, "induces an adult to unlawfully become a prostitute 

or to continue to engage in prostitution"). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A <411011./ -13 ‘,63 
pending forfeiture action, and LVMPD challenges that decision via this writ 

petition. Because it does not appear that LVMPD has an adequate and 

speedy remedy, we choose to entertain its petition. See D.R. Horton, Inc. v. 

Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 474, 168 P.3d 731, 736 (2007). 

However, for the reasons stated below, we deny LVMPD's requested relief. 

Under NRS 179.085(1)(e), a party "aggrieved by . . the 

deprivation of property may move the court having jurisdiction where the 

property was seized for the return of the property on the ground 

that . . . [detention of the property by law enforcement is not reasonable 

under the totality of the circumstances." The statute contemplates that 

such motions will generally be filed within a criminal proceeding. NRS 

179.085(5) ("If a motion pursuant to this section is filed when no criminal 

proceeding is pending, the motion must be treated as a civil complaint 

seeking equitable relief."). 

We see no manifest abuse of discretion or error of law in the 

district court's decision that would warrant writ relief. See Walker v. 

Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 679-81, 476 P.3d 1194, 1196-97 

(2020) (discussing that a petitioner must show a legal right to the relief 

sought or that the district court "rnanifestlf abused its discretion for writ 

relief to be warranted). It is not an abuse of discretion to conclude that 

LVMPD's retention of the money under the circumstances was 

unreasonable because it was unrelated to the pandering charge—McDowell 

did not pay the money to the undercover cop, attempt to purchase anything 

3As the district court has jurisdiction to resolve such motions, we 

decline to issue a writ of prohibition. See NRS 34.320 (providing that a writ 

of prohibition is appropriate when a district court acts in excess of its 

jurisdiction). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2 
for her with the money, or take the money from her. Moreover, LVMPD 

does not assert that the money retains any evidentiary value in the criminal 

case. Although the money is the subject of LVMPD's separate civil 

forfeiture action, the district court was aware of that when making its 

"totality of the circumstances" decision under NRS 179.085(1)(e), and the 

district court's decision does not prevent LVMPD from proceeding in the 

forfeiture case. In light of the foregoing, we 

ORDER the petition DENIED.4 

, C.J. 

Parraguirre 

Cadish 

cc: Hon. Erika D. Ballou, District Judge 

Liesl K. Freedman 

S. Scott Greenberg 

Clark County Public Defender 

Federal Public Defender/Las Vegas 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

4The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the 

decision of this matter under a general order of assignment. 

We lift the stay previously imposed on September 30, 2021. 

3