COLLINS v. STATE (2021)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Collins filed his petition over 30 years after issuance of the remittitur on direct appeal on October 3, 1990, see Collins v. State, Docket No. 19960 (Order Dismissing Appeal, September 14, 1990), and more than 22 years after entry of the amended judgment of conviction filed on March 27. 1998.¹ Thus, Collins’ petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Moreover, Collins’ claim could have been raised on direct appeal, see NRS 34.810(1)(b)(2), and it constituted an abuse of the writ as his claim was new and different from those raised in his previous petition,² see NRS 34.810(2). Collins’ petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(1)(b); NRS 34.810(3). Collins did not allege good cause. Therefore, we conclude the district court did not err by denying Collins’ petition as procedurally barred, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Collins did not appeal from the amended judgment of conviction.

2.   See Collins v. State, Docket No. 26643 (Order of Remand, March 10, 1998) (affirming dismissal of procedurally time-barred petition and remanding to correct clerical error).