Opinion
No. 56715.
05-09-2011
Jerome Maurice BOTIZ, Appellant, v. WARDEN, SOUTHERN DESERT CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Brian Williams, Respondent.
Jerome Maurice Botiz Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney
Jerome Maurice Botiz
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
This is a proper person appeal from an order of the district court denying a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus . Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Kathy A. Hardcastle, Judge.
This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument, NRAP 34(f)(3), and we conclude that the record is sufficient for our review and briefing is unwarranted. See Luckett v. Warden, 91 Nev. 681, 682, 541 P.2d 910, 911 (1975).
In his petition filed on May 25, 2010, appellant first sought credit for time spent on house arrest from February 1, 2006 to November 21, 2006. Appellant failed to demonstrate that he was entitled to the credits because house arrest is not confinement within the meaning of NRS 176.055. State v. Dist. Ct. (Jackson), 121 Nev. 413, 418–19, 116 P.3d 834, 837 (2005). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying this claim.
Second, appellant claimed that he earned a high school diploma while incarcerated and was entitled to 90 days of credits pursuant to NRS 209.4465, yet he asserted he did not receive those credits. Appellant may not challenge the computation of time served in the same petition as his claim concerning a challenge to credit for time spent on house arrest, NRS 34.738(3), which was a challenge to the judgment of conviction, Griffin v. State. 122 Nev. 737, 739, 137 P.3d 1165, 1166 (2006) (overruling Pangallo v. State. 112 Nev. 1533, 930 P.2d 100 (1996) ). Appellant may file a separate petition alleging specific facts concerning credits earned pursuant to NRS 209.4465 in the county in which he is incarcerated. NRS 34.738(1). Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.