HAYES v. STATE (2022)

ORDER AFFIRMING IN PART AND DISMISSING IN PART

In his March 30, 2021, petition, Hayes alleged that the conditions in the prison and the prison's actions regarding COVID-19 were so bad as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment. This claim fell outside the scope of claims allowed to be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus because Hayes is challenging the conditions of confinement and not his judgment of conviction or the computation of time served. See NRS 34.724(1); Bowen v. Warden, 100 Nev. 489, 490, 686 P.2d 250, 250 (1984). Therefore, we conclude the district court did not err by denying this petition.

Hayes indicates he is also appealing from a May 10, 2021, order of the district court denying a supplemental petition. Our review of the record on appeal reveals that no order, oral or written, was entered on that date by the district court. Because Hayes failed to designate an appealable order, this court lacks jurisdiction, and we dismiss this portion of the appeal. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART.