Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State
This text of Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State (Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Muhammad (Rahim) Vs. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muhammad-rahim-vs-state-nev-2019.