Daniels (Aaron) v. State

 State then filed an amended information to recharge appellant with
murder and the matter was set for trial.
Appellant subsequently filed a post-conviction petition for a
writ of habeas corpus in the district court on February 2, 2012, claiming
that a retrial of the murder charge would violate his right against double
jeopardy.' Pursuant to NRS 34.720, a post-conviction petition for a writ of
habeas corpus is available to request "relief from a judgment of conviction
or sentence in a criminal case" or challenge "the computation of time" a
petitioner has served. Moreover, only a "person convicted of a crime" may
"file a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus to obtain relief
from the conviction or sentence." NRS 34.724(1). Appellant acknowledges
that he did not challenge a judgment of conviction, just the State's ability
to again seek a conviction for the murder charge. By raising this claim,
appellant did not attempt to challenge a judgment of conviction or the
computation of time served. Accordingly, appellant did not raise a claim
within the scope of a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
'We note that this court has already denied appellant's claim that
the Double Jeopardy Clause barred any retrial of the murder charge.
Daniels v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, Docket No. 62541 (Order Denying
Petition, May 14, 2014).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A ea
See McConnell u. State, 125 Nev. 243, 247, 212 P.3d 307, 310 (2009).
Therefore, the district court properly denied the petition. 2 Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Hardesty
J.
Douglas 1,9
J.
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Law Office of Betsy Allen
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
2The district court also denied the petition as procedurally barred
pursuant to NRS 34.726, but that statute was not applicable to this
petition as appellant did not challenge the validity of a judgment of
conviction. However, the district court reached the right result in denying
the petition and we therefore affirm the district court's order. See Wyatt u.
State, 86 Nev. 294, 298, 468 P.2d 338, 341 (1970).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) I947A cf±t>