JAMES v. STATE (2021)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

James filed his petition over two years after issuance of the remittitur on direct appeal on July 3, 2018. See James v. State, No. 70486, 2018 WL 3000438 (Nev. June 8, 2018) (Order of Affirmance). Thus, James’ petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). James’ petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice. See id.

James claimed he had good cause because his previous attorney did not inform him about how to file a postconviction petition and he received incorrect advice from other prisoners. These issues did not demonstrate an impediment external to the defense that prevented James from timely filing his petition. See Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252-53, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003); Phelps v. Dir., Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Haberstroh, 119 Nev. 173, 180-81, 69 P.3d 676, 681 (2003). Therefore, the district court did not err by denying the petition as procedurally barred. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.