placing him on the law library list was inadequate. Appellant failed to
demonstrate an impediment external to the defense to excuse his
procedural defect. See Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503,
506 (2003). His lack of legal assistance did not constitute good cause to
excuse the delay. See Phelps v. Dir., Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656,
660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988). He also did not demonstrate that a
three-week deprivation of access to a law library prevented him from filing
a timely petition when he had an entire year to file it, nor did he provide
specific facts to demonstrate that the prison's law library system
interfered with his ability to file a timely petition. See Hargrove a State,
100 Nev. 498, 502,686 P.2d 222, 225 (1984).
Appellant also asserted that the procedural bar did not apply
to him because he was challenging the jurisdiction of the district court to
impose a habitual criminal enhancement and jurisdictional claims may be
raised at any time. Appellant's assertion was without merit, as
appellant's claims challenged the validity of the judgment of conviction
and sentence and did not implicate jurisdiction. See NRS 34.720(1); NRS
34.724(1); see also Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6; NRS 171.010. Therefore, we
conclude that the district court did not err in denying his post-conviction
petition for a writ of habeas corpus as procedurally barred. Accordingly,
we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
J.
Picker:1i:
J. J.
Parraguirre Saitta
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(01 1947A ea
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Andrew Jefferson
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A