that the district court did not err in denying the petition as procedurally
barred. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2
J.
Hardesty
P C1.4.)t
Parraguirre
J.
CHERRY, J., dissenting:
The district court denied the petition without having the State
respond to the petition and without providing appellant an opportunity to
provide cause for the delay. While the district court may summarily deny
a petition for being successive, see NRS 34.745(4), nothing in NRS chapter
34 expressly permits the district court to summarily deny an untimely
petition. Rather, NRS 34.745(1) requires the district court judge to order
2 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
the State to file a response or answer to the petition. I would reverse the
denial of the petition and remand to provide appellant an opportunity to
demonstrate cause for the delay, particularly in light of the very minimal
delay in filing—six days.
cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge
Bernabi Isiordia Bermudez
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A