WASHINGTON v. STATE (2024)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

In his motion, Washington alleged his sentence was illegal because the State could not prove the elements of the crime to which he pleaded guilty, attempted lewdness with a child under the age of 14, as the victim's statement was that the sexual acts actually took place. Washington's claim challenged the validity of his judgment of conviction and was thus outside the scope of claims permissible in a motion to modify or correct an illegal sentence. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Therefore, without considering the merits of this claim, we conclude the district court did not err by denying Washington's motion. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   We have reviewed all documents Washington has filed in this matter, and we conclude no relief from the district court's order is warranted based upon those submissions.