Romero (Eddgar) v. State ( 2014 )

 not under a sentence of death or imprisonment as required by NRS 34.724.
See Coleman v. State, 130 Nev. „ 321 P.3d 863, 867 (2014).
Therefore, because Romero did not meet the imprisonment requirement of
NRS 34.724, he was not eligible for post-conviction habeas relief. See id.For this reason, we affirm the decision of the district court to deny the
petition. 2 Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
J.
Pickering
CL..U.- —[ J.
Parraguirre
J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Valerie Adair, District Judge
Turco & Draskovich
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
2 Although the district court incorrectly addressed the procedural
bars and merits of the claims, we nevertheless affirm because the district
court reached the correct result in denying the petition. See Wyatt v.
State, 86 Nev. 294, 298, 468 P.2d 338, 341 (1970) (holding that a correct
result will not be reversed simply because it is based on the wrong reason).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
03) 1947A e