Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State

Nevada Supreme Court·Decided September 4, 2019·No. 79223·Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

RAHIM MUHAMMAD, No. 79223 Appellant,

vs.

THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILE Respondent.

SPP 0 4 2019

A_ BROWN

CLE PREME COURT BY

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL DEPUrt CLERK

This is a pro se appeal from a judgment of conviction. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Scott N. Freeman, Judge.

Appellant has filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss this appeal.

This court elects to treat this notice as a motion for a voluntary dismissal of this appeal. Cause appearing, the motion is granted. NRAP 42(b). Accordingly, this court ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.'

/.1,4.4; , J.

Hardesty

A/4LX) , J. ,J Stiglich Silver

'Because no remittitur will issue in this matter, see NRAP 42(b), the one-year period for filing a postconviction habeas corpus petition under NRS 34.726(1) shall commence to run from the date of this order.

pi- 37010

cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge Rahim Muhammad Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State, (Neb. 2019).

Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State (Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

§ 34.726
Nevada § 34.726