JOB CARLOS ANTONIO PARRA COLIN v. THE STATE OF NEVADA (2025)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Job Carlos Antonio Parra-Colin appeals from a judgment of conviction, entered pursuant to a guilty plea, of assault with the use of a deadly weapon. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Scott N. Freeman, Judge.

Parra-Colin asserts his guilty plea was not entered knowingly or voluntarily. Specifically, Parra-Colin contends his guilty plea was involuntary because (1) he was misled about the deportation consequences of his guilty plea, and (2) the State committed a Brady ¹ violation by failing to disclose that its witnesses would be unavailable for trial.

Generally, this court will not consider a challenge to the validity of a guilty plea on direct appeal from a judgment of conviction. Bryant v. State, 102 Nev. 268, 272, 721 P.2d 364, 367-68 (1986) (noting that the test for reviewing the validity of guilty pleas “is essentially factual in nature, and thus best suited to trial court review in the first instance”), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Hart v. State, 116 Nev. 558, 1 P.3d 969 (2000). Instead, a defendant must raise a challenge to the validity of their guilty plea in the district court in the first instance unless the error clearly appears from the record. Bryant, 102 Nev. at 272, 721 P.2d at 368; see also Smith v. State, 110 Nev. 1009, 1010 n.1, 879 P.2d 60, 61 n.1 (1994) (stating that the appellate courts will not consider a challenge to the validity of a guilty plea on direct appeal unless “the error clearly appears from the record”). Here, Parra-Colin did not raise his claim in the district court in the first instance, and the alleged errors do not clearly appear in the record. Therefore, we decline to consider this claim for the first time on appeal. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Bulla, C.J.

Gibbons, J.

Westbrook, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).