From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomson v. State

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Jul 31, 2019
No. 76102-COA (Nev. App. Jul. 31, 2019)

Opinion

No. 76102-COA

07-31-2019

DAVID ROBERT THOMSON, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

David Robert Thomson appeals from an order of the district court denying a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on February 8, 2018. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Valerie Adair, Judge.

This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument. NRAP 34(f)(3).

Thomson filed his petition nearly four years after issuance of the remittitur on direct appeal on May 27, 2014. See Thomson v. State, Docket No. 60169 (Order of Affirmance, February 28, 2014). Thus, Thomson's petition was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Moreover, Thomson's petition was successive because he had previously filed a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and it constituted an abuse of the writ as he raised claims new and different from those raised in his previous petition. See NRS 34.810(1)(b)(2); NRS 34.810(2). Thomson's petition was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(1)(b); NRS 34.810(3).

Thomson v. State, Docket No. 70354-COA (Order of Affirmance, July 12, 2017). --------

Thomson claims the district court erred by denying his good cause claim. Relying in part on Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012), Thomson argued that ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel excused his procedural defects. Ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel was not good cause in the instant case because the appointment of counsel in the prior postconviction proceedings was not statutorily or constitutionally required. See Crump v. Warden, 113 Nev. 293, 303, 934 P.2d 247, 253 (1997); McKague v. Warden, 112 Nev. 159, 164, 912 P.2d 255, 258 (1996). Further, the Nevada Supreme Court has held that Martinez does not provide good cause. See Brown v. McDaniel, 130 Nev. 565, 571, 331 P.3d 867, 871-72 (2014). Therefore, we conclude the district court did not err by denying the petition as procedurally barred, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

/s/_________, C.J.

Gibbons /s/_________, J.
Tao /s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. Valerie Adair, District Judge

David Robert Thomson

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

Thomson v. State

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Jul 31, 2019
No. 76102-COA (Nev. App. Jul. 31, 2019)
Case details for

Thomson v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID ROBERT THOMSON, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Jul 31, 2019

Citations

No. 76102-COA (Nev. App. Jul. 31, 2019)