Nasby (Brendan) v. State

 Further, because the State pleaded laches, appellant was required to
overcome the presumption of prejudice to the State. See NRS 34.800(2).
Appellant asserted that he had good cause to excuse the
procedural defects because (1) his previous post-conviction counsel were
ineffective, (2) he recently located evidence supporting a prior ineffective-
assistance claim, and (3) the district court order denying his first petition
was void. To establish good cause "a petitioner must show that an
impediment external to the defense prevented him or her from complying
with the state procedural default rules." See Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev.
248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003). Appellant's reasons for the delay in
filing his petition do not constitute good cause. See Brown v. McDaniel,
130., Nev. Adv. Op. 60, 331 P.3d 867, 870 (2014). Appellant also failed to
overcome the presumption of prejudice to the State and therefore his
petition is procedurally barred. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2
Parraguirre
?Qa.
Douglas
2 Thisappeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument,
NRAP 34(0(3), and we conclude that the record is sufficient for our review
and briefing is unwarranted. See Luckett v. Warden, 91 Nev. 681, 682, 541
P.2d 910, 911 (1975).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(6 ) 194/A
CHERRY, J., concurring:
Although I would extend the equitable rule recognized in
Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012), to this case because appellant
was convicted of murder and is facing a severe sentence, see Brown v.
McDaniel, 130 Nev., Adv. Op. 60, 331 P.3d 867 (2014) (Cherry, J.,
dissenting), I concur in the judgment on appeal.
Cherry
cc: Hon. William D. Kephart, District Judge
Brendan James Nasby
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A eo