BOWLING v. STATE (2019)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.¹ Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Michelle Leavitt, Judge.

Appellant filed his petition on May 23, 2018, more than 37 years after entry of the judgment of conviction on March 23, 1981. Thus, appellant's petition was untimely filed.² See NRS 34.726(1). Appellant's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice. See id. We conclude that the district court did not err in the denying the petition as procedurally barred because appellant did not provide any good-cause allegation and his jurisdictional claims were patently without merit as they did not implicate the jurisdiction of the courts. Nev. Const. art. 6 § 6; NRS 171.010.³ Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Having considered the pro se brief filed by appellant, we conclude that a response is not necessary. NRAP 46A(c). This appeal therefore has been submitted for decision based on the pro se brief and the record. See NRAP 34(f)(3).

2.   The petition was also filed more than 25 years after the effective date of NRS 34.726. See 1991 Nev. Stat., ch. 44, §§ 5, 33, at 75-76, 92.

3.   We note that appellant's general challenge to the Nevada Revised Statutes fails. The Statutes of Nevada contain the laws with the enacting clauses required by the constitution. The Nevada Revised Statutes simply reproduce those laws as classified, codified, and annotated by the Legislative Counsel Bureau. NRS 220.120.