WARE v. STATE (2022)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Ware filed his petition on October 6, 2021, more than three years after entry of the judgment of conviction on April 19, 2018.¹ Thus, Ware's petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Ware's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice. See id.

Ware appeared to claim that he had good cause because he was unaware of the procedural time bar. However, that issue did not constitute an impediment external to the defense that prevented Ware 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 Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Haberstroh, 119 Nev. 173, 180-81, 69 P.3d 676, 681 (2003).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, Ware was not entitled to relief based upon this good-cause claim. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying the petition as procedurally barred, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ware did not pursue a direct appeal.