KHAYREE AMEEN SAAFIR v. THE STATE OF NEVADA (2024)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Khayree Ameen Saafir appeals from a district court order dismissing a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on February 28, 2022, and a supplemental petition filed on October 25, 2022. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County: Barry L. Breslow, Judge.

Saafir filed his petition over one year after entry of the judgment of conviction on November 5, 2020.¹ Thus, Saafir's petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Saafir's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice. See id.

Saafir claimed he had good cause to overcome the procedural time bar because counsel had only recently turned over his case file. Counsel's failure to send Saafir his case file did not constitute cause for the delay because it did not prevent Saafir from filing a timely petition. See Hood v. State, 111 Nev. 335, 338, 890 P.2d 797, 798 (1995). Therefore, we conclude that Saafir's petition was procedurally time-barred and that the district court did not err by dismissing Saafir's petition.² Accordingly,

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

Gibbons, C.J.

Bulla, J.

Westbrook, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Saafir did not appeal from the judgment of conviction.

2.   The district court failed to address the procedural bar and instead denied the petition on the merits. We conclude this was error. See State v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Riker), 121 Nev. 225, 231, 112 P.3d 1070, 1074 (2005) (“Application of the statutory procedural default rules to postconviction habeas petitions is mandatory.”). We nevertheless affirm the district court's denial of relief for the reasons stated herein. See Wyatt v. State, 86 Nev. 294, 298, 468 P.2d 338, 341 (1970) (holding a correct result will not be reversed simply because it is based on the wrong reason).