that he would appeal appellant's sentence. Appellant did not provide any
facts indicating that he believed an appeal had been filed or that he filed
his petition within a reasonable time of learning that counsel had not filed
an appeal. See id. at 254-55, 71 P.3d at 507-08. Thus, we conclude that
the district court did not err in rejecting this good cause argument.
Appellant also claimed that the law library was not equipped
to assist someone who lacked legal knowledge, that he was mentally ill
and had been taken advantage of by other inmates, and that he had been
placed in protected segregation. Appellant's lack of legal knowledge does
not constitute good cause. Phelps v. Dir., Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev.
656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988). As to his assertions that he was
mentally ill and placed in segregation, he failed to specify any facts as to
how this impeded him from filing a timely post-conviction petition. See
Hathaway, 119 Nev. at 254-55, 71 P.3d at 507-08. Therefore, the district
court did not err in denying his petition as procedurally barred.
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2
J.
Saitta
2We deny appellant's motion for a stay and abeyance. We have
reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to
the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based
upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has
attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not
previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to
consider them in the first instance.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Raffick Sahibjohn
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A