From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCoy v. State

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 23, 2017
No. 70975 (Nev. App. Mar. 23, 2017)

Opinion

No. 70975

03-23-2017

DARREN LAMONT MCCOY, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Appellant Darren Lamont McCoy appeals from a district court order dismissing the postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus he filed on August 31, 2015. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Michael Villani, Judge.

This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument. NRAP 34(f)(3).

McCoy's petition was filed one year and eleven days after the remittitur on direct appeal was issued on August 20, 2014; consequently, it was untimely filed and procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1).

McCoy v. State, Docket No. 63316 (Order of Affirmance, July 23, 2014).

McCoy claims the district court erred by dismissing his petition because he was not an attorney, he should have been allowed an evidentiary hearing to develop the record, he was never given a chance due to the ineffectiveness of postconviction counsel, and the Nevada Southern Detention Center's law library provided inadequate support.

McCoy also claims he can show that prison officials interfered with his ability to file a timely petition, but he did not make this showing in the court below and we will not consider this bare allegation on appeal. --------

The district court found McCoy's claims he was not an attorney, the law library was inadequate, and postconviction counsel was ineffective did not provide good cause to excuse the untimely petition. McCoy had ample time (eight months) to file a habeas petition while housed in the High Desert State Prison. And because McCoy's conviction was the result of a guilty plea and his habeas petition was time-barred, the issues were simple and could be resolved without an evidentiary hearing.

We defer to the district court's factual findings, see State v. Huebler, 128 Nev. 192, 197, 275 P.3d 91, 95 (2012), and we conclude the district court did not err by dismissing McCoy's petition as procedurally barred, see NRS 34.770(2); Brown v. McDaniel, 130 Nev. ___, ___, 331 P.3d 867, 870 (2014); State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Riker), 121 Nev. 225, 231, 112 P.3d 1070, 1074 (2005); 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 Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Haberstroh, 119 Nev. 173, 180-81, 69 P.3d 676, 681 (2003); see generally Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349 (1996). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

/s/_________, C.J.

Silver

/s/_________, J.

Tao

/s/_________, J.

Gibbons cc: Hon. Michael Villani, District Judge

Darren Lamont McCoy

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

McCoy v. State

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 23, 2017
No. 70975 (Nev. App. Mar. 23, 2017)
Case details for

McCoy v. State

Case Details

Full title:DARREN LAMONT MCCOY, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Mar 23, 2017

Citations

No. 70975 (Nev. App. Mar. 23, 2017)