HATFIELD v. STATE (2020)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Gregory Allen Hatfield appeals from an order of the district court denying a motion to modify or correct an illegal sentence filed on December 4, 2019. Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Robert W. Lane, Judge.

In his motion, Hatfield argued that his sentence was facially illegal and the district court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him as a habitual criminal because his sentence was improperly enhanced twice. Specifically, Hatfield argued that his sentence was already enhanced from a misdemeanor battery to a category B felony pursuant to the deadly weapon enhancement. Therefore, the district court was not allowed to also enhance his sentence pursuant to the habitual criminal statute. Hatfield raised this exact claim in his appeal from his judgment of conviction, and the Nevada Supreme Court rejected it. See Hatfield v. State, Docket No. 51719 (Order of Affirmance, February 11, 2009). Thus, this claim was barred by the doctrine of law of the case, which cannot be avoided by a more detailed and precisely focused argument. See Hall v. State, 91 Nev. 314, 315-16, 535 P.2d 797, 798-99 (1975). Accordingly, we conclude the district court did not err by denying the motion, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.