From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Dec 20, 2011
373 P.3d 922 (Nev. 2011)

Opinion

No. 59646.

12-20-2011

Charles H. HILL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Charles H. Hill Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney


Charles H. Hill

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a proper person appeal from an order denying “request to prove extreme detriment.” Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jessie Elizabeth Walsh, Judge.

Because no statute or court rule permits an appeal from an order denying the aforementioned request, we lack jurisdiction. Castillo v. State, 106 Nev. 349, 352, 792 P.2d 1133, 1135 (1990). Accordingly, we

It appears that appellant sought to challenge the validity of his judgment of conviction and sentence. Such a challenge must be raised in a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court in the first instance. NRS 34.724(2)(b) ; NRS 34.738(1). We express no opinion as to whether appellant can satisfy the procedural requirements of NRS chapter 34.

--------

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Hill v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Dec 20, 2011
373 P.3d 922 (Nev. 2011)
Case details for

Hill v. State

Case Details

Full title:Charles H. HILL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada.

Date published: Dec 20, 2011

Citations

373 P.3d 922 (Nev. 2011)