Smith (Michael) v. State

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: April 10, 2013
• Docket: 61536
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(3). Appellant claimed he had good cause to excuse the procedural bars because the State "imposed an impediment," judicial misconduct, fraudulent misrepresentation, the inadequate law library, lack of access to the law library, and clerical malfeasance. Appellant failed to demonstrate good cause as he merely listed these claims and provided no specific facts to support them. See State v. Haberstroh, 119 Nev. 173, 181, 69 P.3d 676, 681 (2003). Next, appellant claimed NRS 34.810 is unconstitutionally vague, ambiguous, and burdensome. However, the procedural bars reasonably regulate post-conviction petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, and are therefore constitutional. See Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 878, 34 P.3d 519, 531 (2001) (citing Passanisi v. Director, Dep't Prisons, 105 Nev. 63, 66, 769 P.2d 72, 74 (1989)). The district court did not err in dismissing appellant's petition as procedurally barred. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

' J. Hardesty

J. Parraguirre Cherry

. . continued

2012); Smith v. State, Docket No. 60696 (Order Dismissing Appeal, May 17, 2012).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Abbi Silver, District Judge Michael Duane Smith Attorney GenerallC arson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

7.:1-11M17 -