Armstead (Joe) v. State ( 2013 )

 NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(1)(b); NRS 34.810(3). Moreover, because the
State specifically pleaded laches, appellant was required to overcome the
rebuttable presumption of prejudice. NRS 34.800(2).
Appellant first claimed that he had good cause because he had
been challenging his conviction in federal proceedings. We conclude that
the district court did not err in denying this claim. The pursuit of federal
habeas relief does not constitute good cause to excuse a late and successive
petition in Nevada. See Colley v. State, 105 Nev. 235, 236, 773 P.2d 1229,
1230 (1989).
Appellant next claimed that he had good cause because he was
not represented by counsel during the first post-conviction proceedings.
Appellant claimed that the decision in Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 132S. Ct. 1309 (2012), provided good cause because the lack of assistance of
post-conviction counsel prevented him from complying with post-
conviction procedures. We conclude that the district court did not err in
denying this claim. Appellant's reliance upon Martinez was misplaced as
Martinez relates to federal procedural bars and not state procedural bars.
Thus, the holding in Martinez would not provide good cause because it is
inapplicable in state court. Further, as appellant never requested counsel
in the first post-conviction proceedings, he cannot complain of the failure
to appoint counsel in those proceedings. Finally, appellant failed to
overcome the presumption of prejudice to the State. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
J.
SUPREME COURT
Parraguirre Cherry
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) I947A
cc: Hon. Valorie J. Vega, District Judge
Joe Kelly Armstead
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
3