findings if they are supported by substantial evidence and not clearly
wrong but review the court's application of the law to those facts de novo.
Lacier v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). Here,
the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing and heard testimony
from one of Smith's trial counsel Smith did not testify at the evidentiary
hearing and he did not call his appellate counsel to testify. The district
court found that counsel "made a reasonable tactical decision not to object
to what [Smith] now alleges was the State's reference to [his] decision not
to testify," and determined that counsel was not ineffective. See
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984); Kirksey v.
State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996); see also Cullen v.
Pinholster, 563 U.S. „ 131 S. Ct. 1388, 1408 (2011) ("Surmounting
Strickland's high bar is never an easy task." (quotation marks omitted)
(alteration omitted)). The district court also determined that appellate
counsel was not ineffective. See Kirksey, 112 Nev. at 998, 923 P.2d at
1113-14. We conclude that the district court's findings are supported by
substantial evidence, see Riley v. State, 110 Nev. 638, 647, 878 P.2d 272,
278 (1994), and the district court did not err by rejecting Smith's
ineffective-assistance claims. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
I Act,t e.€0.42\ ' J.
Hardesty
, J. , J.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
cc: Hon. Jerome T. Tao, District Judge
Brent D. Percival
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A