HILL v. STATE (2020)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

In his motion, Hill sought to vacate his convictions on the ground that an offender cannot be convicted of both lewdness and sexual assault for the same act. Hill's claim fell outside the narrow scope of claims permissible in a motion to correct an illegal sentence. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Therefore, without considering the merits of any claim raised in the motion, we conclude the district court did not err by denying the motion. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   We have reviewed all documents Hill has filed in this matter, and we conclude no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent Hill attempts to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we decline to consider them in the first instance. See Rimer v. State, 131 Nev. 307, 328 n.3, 351 P.3d 697, 713 n.3 (2015).