Adams (Daniel) v. State

694 (1984); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding that an evidentiary hearing was unwarranted, see NRS 34.770(2); Nika v. State, 124 Nev. 1272, 1300-01, 198 P.3d 839, 858 (2008) (holding that a petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing only when specific factual allegations are asserted "that are not belied or repelled by the record and that, if true, would entitle him to relief'), and did not err by rejecting Adams's ineffective-assistance claims. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED, 1 Saitta 1 1n his fast track statement, Adams inappropriately incorporates and relies upon documents submitted to the district court for his argument on the merits of the appeal. NRAP 28(e)(2). Additionally, the fast track statement does not comply with NRAP 32(a)(4) because it does not have 1- inch margins on all four sides. Counsel for Adams is cautioned that failure to comply with the briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n). SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A le cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Carmine J. Colucci & Associates Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A e