WILEY v. WARDEN HDSP (2024)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

In his petition below, Wiley neither alleged nor demonstrated that he had exhausted his administrative remedies prior to filing the petition. See NRS 34.724(1). Thus, we conclude the district court did not err by dismissing his petition without prejudice. See NRS 34.810(2) (providing that the “court shall dismiss a [habeas] petition that challenges the computation of time served ․ without prejudice if the court determines that the petitioner did not exhaust all available administrative remedies to resolve such a challenge as required by NRS 34.724”).² Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

2.   In his petition, Wiley sought the application of credits to his minimum sentence pursuant to Assembly Bill 271 (A.B. 271). We note that A.B. 271 was never passed into law and thus would not provide a basis for relief.To the extent Wiley argues it was error for the district court to refer to the Nevada Department of Corrections’ administrative regulations, specifically AR 740, we conclude it was not error for the district court to reference the appropriate administrative regulation that Wiley was required to exhaust.