French (William) v. State

 34.810(2). Appellant's petition was procedurally barred absent a
demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1);
NRS 34.810(1)(b); NRS 34.810(3).
First, appellant claimed he had good cause pursuant to Lafler
v. Cooper, 566 U.S. , 132 S. Ct. 1376 (2012), and Missouri v. Frye, 566
U.S. , 132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012), because counsel was ineffective in
advising him to reject a plea offer from the State. Appellant's good cause
argument was without merit because this claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel was always available to be raised and appellant failed to
demonstrate why he waited more than 10 years to raise it. Further,
because his case was final when Lafler and Frye were decided, he failed to
demonstrate that the cases would apply retroactively to him. Even if
Lafler and Frye announced new rules of constitutional law, he failed to
allege facts that meet either exception to the general principle that such
rules do not apply retroactively to cases which were already final when the
new rules were announced. See Colwell v. State, 118 Nev. 807, 816-17, 59
P.3d 463, 469-70 (2002). Therefore, the district court did not err in
denying this claim.
Next, relying in part on Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. , 132 S.
Ct. 1309 (2012), appellant argued that he had good cause because he was
not appointed counsel in the first post-conviction proceedings. We
conclude that this argument lacked merit. The appointment of counsel
was discretionary in the first post-conviction proceedings, see NRS
34.750(1), and appellant failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion.
Further, this court has recently held that Martinez does not apply to
Nevada's statutory post-conviction procedures. See Brown v. McDaniel,
Nev. P.3d (Adv. Op. No. 60, August 7, 2014). Thus, the

SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A 94104,
 failure to appoint post-conviction counsel and the decision in Martinez
would not provide good cause for this late and successive petition.
Therefore, the district court did not err in denying the petition as
procedurally barred, and we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

41.10.AveaAti
n J.
Hardesty

J.
Douglas

a]
Cherry

cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge
William Edward French
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A