NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(3). A petitioner may be entitled to review of
defaulted claims if failure to review the claims would result in a
fundamental miscarriage of justice. Mazzan v. Warden, 112 Nev. 838, 842,
921 P.2d 920, 922 (1996). In order to demonstrate a fundamental
miscarriage of justice, a petitioner must make a colorable showing of
actual innocence of the crime. Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 887, 34
P.3d 519, 537 (2001).
Appellant's claim that new case law, knowledge and
information excused his procedural defaults was insufficient as he failed to
provide any facts or specific arguments identifying the new case law,
knowledge or information or explain how these excused his fourth late
petition. See Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506
(2003). To the extent that appellant claimed that a fundamental
miscarriage of justice should overcome application of the procedural bars,
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. . . new evidence." Calderon v. Thompson, 523
U.S. 538, 559 (1998) (quoting Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 327 (1995)); see
also Pellegrini, 117 Nev. at 887, 34 P.3d at 537; Mazzan, 112 Nev. at 842,
921 P.2d at 922. We therefore conclude that the district court did not err
in dismissing appellant's petition. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Pickering
Picht tue
r J.
J.
j'
Parraguirre Saitta
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(C11 1947A
cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge
Brian Lee Allen
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A ses.