Suggs (Joe) v. State

was untimely filed. See NRS 34.726(1). Moreover, appellant's motion constituted an abuse of the writ as he raised claims new and different from those raised in his previous petition. 2 See NRS 34.810(2). Appellant's motion was procedurally barred absent a demonstration of good cause and actual prejudice. See NRS 34.726(1); NRS 34.810(3). Appellant did not attempt to provide cause for the delay. Moreover, appellant failed to demonstrate actual prejudice because "house arrest does not constitute time 'actually spent in confinement' for which the duration of a sentence may be credited." State v. Second Judicial Dist. Court (Jackson), 121 Nev. 413, 418-19, 116 P.3d 834, 837 (2005). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying the motion. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 3

cc: Hon. James M. Bixler, District Judge Joe Suggs Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

Footnotes

[4] -t 61„.1 Hardesty ) J. J. Douglas Cherry 2 Suggs v. State, Docket No. 49775 (Order of Affirmance, June 9, 2008). 3 We 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 2 (Oj 1947A ateat3/44 e, j - SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 0) 1947A ca