Opinion
No. 80822-COA
11-13-2020
DAVID LEROY WALKER, Appellant, v. JEFFREY HOWELL, WARDEN, Respondent.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
David Leroy Walker appeals from an order of the district court denying a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on December 10, 2019. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; William D. Kephart, Judge.
Walker filed his petition more than one year after entry of the judgment of conviction on March 22, 2018. Thus, Walker's petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Walker's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause—cause for the delay and undue prejudice, see id., or that he was actually innocent such that it would result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice were his claims not decided on the merits, see Berry v. State, 131 Nev. 957, 966, 363 P.3d 1148, 1154 (2015).
Walker did appeal from his judgment of conviction.
Walker claims the district court erred by denying his petition as procedurally time barred. Walker claimed he had good cause because he has mental health issues, lacks training in the law, and has intellectual disabilities. These alleged issues did not constitute good cause because they were not impediments external to the defense. See Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003); see also Phelps v. Dir., Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 1306 (1988) (holding that petitioner's claim of organic brain damage, borderline mental disability, and reliance on assistance of inmate law clerk unschooled in the law did not constitute good cause for the filing of a procedurally barred postconviction petition).
Walker also claimed he could overcome the procedural time bar because he was actually innocent of assault on an officer by a prisoner. Specifically, he claimed the police had lacked probable cause to arrest him, he was not a prisoner at time of the assault, and he may have been mentally incompetent or insane at the time of the crime. "[A]ctual innocence means factual innocence, not mere legal insufficiency." Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614, 623 (1998) (internal quotation marks omitted). To demonstrate actual innocence, a "petitioner must demonstrate that, in light of all the evidence, it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (addressing actual innocence in guilty plea cases). Walker's claims challenged the legal sufficiency of the evidence against him, not his factual innocence, and he failed to demonstrate that no reasonable juror would have convicted him in light of all of the evidence. Therefore, we conclude the district court did not err by denying the petition as procedurally time barred. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. William D. Kephart, District Judge
David Leroy Walker
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk