5

10

15

20

25

F I LED Electronically

07-16-2009:12:16:31 PM Howard W. Conyers

Clerk of the Court 1 Code: 2915 I!:~.msacti()n #902497

2

3

4

IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA6

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE7 *** 8

9 KIMBERLY CRADLER

Appellant, Case No.: CR09~0889

11 vs. Dept. No.: 10

12 13 CITY OF RENO, a municipal

corporation 14

Respondent.

16

17 ORDER GRANTING MOnON TO DISMISS APPEAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

18 On March 4, 2009, KIMBERLY CRADLER (hereafter "Appellant") was convicted of

19 Violation of Extended Protection Order - a breach of RMC §8.12.140. Subsequently, the

Appellant - acting in pro per- filed a Notice of Appeal on April 20, 2009, and her Opening

21 Brief was filed June 2, 2009. ,

22 The CITY OF RENO (hereafter "Respondent") filed a Motion to Dismiss on June 15,

23 2009. In support of its Motion, the Respondent argues that dismissal is appropriate as the

24 Appellant has failed to provide a transcript from the prior proceeding - a violation of

Nevada Rule of Appellate Procedure 9. This Motion was submitted for this Court's

26 consideration on July 1,2009, and comes before the Court unopposed1•

27

28 1 District Court Rule 13(3) provides, "Failure of the opposing party to serve and file his written opposition may be construed as an admission that the motion is meritorious and a consent to granting the same."

-1­

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

NRAP 9(a) requires the appellant file a transcript request form specifying the

portions of the transcript requested no later than 15 days from the date the notice of

appeal was filed. If no transcript is requested, the appellant must file and serve a

certificate to that effect within the same time period. Id. A partis failure to comply with

the time limits of this RUle may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of

the appeal. NRAP 9(c).

A review of the record reveals that no transcript request form was filed. Also absent

was a filing indicating that no transcript is requested. This is in contravention of the clear

language of NRAP 9(a). Therefore, pursuant to NRAP 9(c) and in light of the fact that no

Opposition was filed, the Motion to Dismiss shall be granted without prejudice. As such,

the Appellant may perfect her appeal by filing the necessary documents in accordance with

aforementioned Rule.

Also worth noting is a Request for Submission filed June 19,2009, concerning an

"Emergency Motion for Stay". This Court was not provided with'a copy of the pertinent

Motion and was therefore unable to review its contents. However, any deciSion concerning

that Motion is rendered moot by this Order. Therefore, the Emergency Motion for Stay

shall be denied as moot at this juncture.

NOW, THEREFORE,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent's Motion to

Dismiss is GRANTED without prejudice.

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Appellant's Emergency Motion for Stay is

DENIED as moot.

DATED this day of July, 2009. /5

~~ "5fEiE P. ELLIOTT District Judge

-2­