Hundley (James) v. State ( 2013 )

 law library, the prison relied on the paging system, and the prison lacked
persons trained in the law. Appellant failed to demonstrate cause for the
delay. Appellant failed to demonstrate that the prison failed to provide
adequate means of accessing legal research materials or that the prison
lacked inmate law clerks. Appellant further failed to demonstrate that
any alleged deficiencies excused his more than 13-year delay.
Next, appellant claimed that he recently discovered evidence
not presented at trial due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The
evidence appears to be statements of one of the victims at the preliminary
hearing and inconsistent statements to the police. This claim was
reasonably available to be raised in a timely petition and ineffective
assistance-of-counsel claims that are themselves procedurally barred
cannot establish good cause. Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252-53, 71
P.3d 503, 506 (2003); see also Edwards v. Carpenter, 529 U.S. 446, 453
(2000).
Finally, appellant appeared to argue that a fundamental
miscarriage of justice should overcome application of the procedural time
bar. Appellant did not demonstrate actual innocence because he failed to
show that "it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have
convicted him in light of. . . new evidence." Calderon v. Thompson, 523
U.S. 538, 559 (1998) (quoting Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 327 (1995)); see
also Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 887, 34 P.3d 519, 537 (2001);
Mazzan v. Warden, 112 Nev. 838, 842, 921 P.2d 920, 922 (1996). We
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
I rq-P4.!W:5'iV7:=S7-261.1
therefore conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's
petition. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2
Gibbons
Douglas
cc: Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge
James Derrick Hundley
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
2We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in
proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude
that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent
that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those
submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings
below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A 4-:•:
F41:***41