Hull (Roger) v. State

34.810(1)(b)(2); NRS 34.810(2). Appellant's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(1)(b); NRS 34.810(3). Appellant first claimed that the procedural bars did not apply because the district court did not have jurisdiction to convict him because the laws reproduced in the Nevada Revised Statutes did not contain an enacting clause as required by the Nevada Constitution. Nev. Const. art. 4, § 23. Appellant's claim was without merit. Appellant's claim did not implicate the jurisdiction of the courts. Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6; NRS 171.010. Moreover, the Statutes of Nevada contain the laws with the enacting clauses required by the constitution. The Nevada Revised Statutes reproduce those laws as classified, codified, and annotated by the Legislative Counsel. NRS 220.120. Second, appellant claimed that he had good cause because he was immune from prosecution due to NRS 432B.160, which grants immunity to persons reporting child abuse or neglect. This claim cannot constitute good cause as appellant raised this issue in a previous petition and this court rejected that claim. Hull v. State, Docket No. 44376 (Order of Affirmance September 14, 2005). The doctrine of law of the case prevents further litigation of this claim and "cannot be avoided by a more detailed and precisely focused argument." Hall v. State, 91 Nev. 314, 316, 535 P.2d 797, 799 (1975). Third, appellant claimed that he suffers from a fundamental miscarriage of justice. Appellant did not demonstrate a fundamental miscarriage of justice because he failed to show that "it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him in light of. . . new evidence." Calderon v. Thompson, 523 U.S. 538, 559 (1998) (quoting SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 327 (1995)); see also Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 887, 34 P.3d 519, 537 (2001); Mazzan v. Warden, 112 Nev. 838, 842, 921 P.2d 920, 922 (1996). We therefore conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's petition as procedurally barred. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 3 J. cc: Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge Roger William Hull Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Second District Court Clerk 3 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 3 9D) 1947A •