Gill (Kevin) v. State

 application of the law to those facts de novo. Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev.
682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005).
Appellant claims that counsel was ineffective for failing to
present mitigating evidence at his sentencing hearing, for failing to move
to sever the trial from his co-defendant's trial, for failing to file a motion to
suppress the eyewitness identification, and because there was an
irreconcilable conflict between counsel and appellant. Appellant failed to
provide this court with any of the necessary documents in order to review
his claims. Appellant did not provide this court with any transcripts of
trial, sentencing, or other hearings at the trial court level, nor did
appellant provide this court with the co-defendant's motion to sever. The
burden is on the appellant to provide an adequate record enabling this
court to review assignments of error. Thomas v. State, 120 Nev. 37, 43
n.4, 83 P.3d 818, 822 n.4 (2004); see also Greene v. State, 96 Nev. 555, 558,
612 P.2d 686, 688 (1980). As appellant failed to meet that burden, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
4
Hardesty
4.4 cistati , J.
Douglas
;e741
es J.
Cherry
Ovut J.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge
Story Law Group
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A