HEITZ v. STATE (2020)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Heitz challenges the constitutionality of his sentence. Heitz waived his right to appeal from his judgment of conviction, and he does not challenge the validity of that waiver or claim the sentence was not imposed in accordance with the negotiated agreement. We therefore conclude Heitz is not entitled to relief, see Cruzado v. State, 110 Nev. 745, 747, 879 P.2d 1195, 1195-96 (1994), overruled on other grounds by Lee v. State, 115 Nev. 207, 210, 985 P.2d 164, 166 (1999), and we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   We have reviewed all documents Heitz has filed in this matter, and we conclude no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent Heitz has attempted 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.