There are three exceptions to the two-year statute of limitations, including: "(1) newly discovered evidence, (2) the petitioner establishes that the petitioner suffered from a physical disability or mental disease that precluded timely assertion of the application for relief, or (3) the petitioner asserts a new interpretation of federal or state law is retroactively applicable to the petitioner's case." Carlson v. State, 2018 ND 81, ¶ 6, 908 N.W.2d 711 (citing N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(3)(a)).

The court did not err in concluding Atkins' claims were barred by res judicata and that he failed to prove he suffered a mental disease which precluded the timely filing of his application for post-conviction relief. See Carlson v. State, 2018 ND 81, ¶ 8, 908 N.W.2d 711 (applicant failed to show he fell under the second exception to the two-year statute of limitations for post-conviction relief by failing to present evidence that his mental condition precluded timely assertion of application). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), (6), and (7). See Carlson v. State , 2018 ND 81, ¶ 7, 908 N.W.2d 711 (dismissal is appropriate when the alleged newly discovered evidence does not satisfy the exception under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(3)(a)(1) because the evidence is not new and would not establish the petitioner did not engage in the criminal conduct for which he was convicted).