reasonable time after discovery of the withheld evidence, see State v.
Huebler, 128 Nev. , n.3, 275 P.3d 91, 95 n.3 (2012); see also
Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 254-55, 71 P.3d 503, 507-08 (2003).
Appellant did not state when he discovered the allegedly withheld
evidence and thus failed to demonstrate cause for the delay. To the extent
appellant argued that the ineffective assistance of counsel was good cause,
that claim itself was procedurally barred and thus could not have
constituted good cause. See Hathaway, 119 Nev. at 252-53, 71 P.3d at 506.
Second, appellant argued that he was actually innocent such
that denying consideration of his substantive claims would result in a
fundamental miscarriage of justice. Appellant did not demonstrate actual
innocence because he failed to show that "it is more likely than not that no
reasonable juror would have convicted him in light of the new evidence."
Calderon v. Thompson, 523 U.S. 538, 559 (1998) (quoting 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. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Saitta
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A e
cc: Hon. Elliott A. Sattler, District Judge
David Abara
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e
Abara (David) v. State
Combined Opinion