Polk (Renard) v. State ( 2014 )

 constituted an abuse of the writ as he raised claims new and different
from those raised in his previous petitions. 3 See NRS 34.810(1)(b)(2); NRS
34.810(2). Appellant'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). Moreover, because the State specifically
pleaded laches, appellant was required to overcome the rebuttable
presumption of prejudice. NRS 34.800(2).
First, appellant claimed he had good cause because he did not
have adequate access to the prison's law library. Appellant failed to
demonstrate that lack of access to the library deprived him of meaningful
access to the courts. See Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 828 (1977),
limited by Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 354-56 (1996). Appellant's
previous proper person motions filed in the district court indicate that his
access to the court was not improperly limited by restrictions on use of the
prison law library or due to prison law library policies. Accordingly,
appellant failed to demonstrate that official interference caused him to be
unable to comply with the procedural bars. See Hathaway ix State, 119
Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003).
Second, appellant claimed that he needed to again raise
certain claims because they were previously denied due to
misrepresentations by the District Attorney. Appellant did not support
this claim with sufficient factual support and bare claims are insufficient
3Polk v. State, Docket No. 44087 (Order of Affirmance and Limited
Remand to Correct the Judgment of Conviction, January 25, 2005).
Appellant also filed post-conviction petitions for a writ of habeas corpus in
the district court on January 27, 2010, May 19, 2011, and April 9, 2013.
Appellant did not appeal the denial of those petitions.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A dem
to demonstrate a petitioner is entitled to relief. See Hargrove v. State, 100
Nev. 498, 502-03, 686 P.2d 222, 225 (1984).
Third, appellant claimed that the procedural bars in NRS
chapter 34 are unconstitutionally vague, ambiguous, and burdensome.
This court has previously held that the procedural bars are constitutional.
See Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 878, 34 P.3d 519, 531 (2001) (citing
Passanisi V. Dir., Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 105 Nev. 63, 66, 769 P.2d 72, 74
(1989)). Moreover, the procedural bar statutes discussed previously
provide to a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of the regulations
governing post-conviction petitions. See generally State a Castaneda, 126
Nev. , 245 P.3d 550, 553 (2010).
Fourth, appellant claimed that the State withheld exculpatory
evidence in the form of the victim's recantation. Appellant failed to
support this claim with any factual support and unsupported claims are
insufficient to demonstrate that a petitioner is entitled to relief. See
Hargrove, 100 Nev. at 502-03, 686 P.2d at 225. Further, appellant failed
to demonstrate that the State withheld this supposed evidence or that
there was a reasonable probability that the outcome of trial would have
been different had he possessed this evidence as he confessed to
committing the crimes. See State a Huebler, 128 Nev. „ 275 P.3d
91, 95 (2012) (citing State a Bennett, 119 Nev. 589, 599, 81 P.3d 1, 8
(2003)), cert. denied, U.S. , 133 S. Ct. 988 (2013). Therefore, the
district court did not err in dismissing appellant's petition as procedurally
barred.
Finally, appellant claimed that the Nevada prisons are
impermissibly overcrowded. This claim challenged the conditions of
appellant's confinement and a petition for a writ of habeas corpus was not
the proper vehicle to raise such a claim. See Bowen a Warden, 100 Nev.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A err>
489, 490, 686 P.2d 250, 250 (1984). Therefore, appellant is not entitled to
relief for this claim. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
i-"tsA J.
Hardesty r
J.
Douglas
J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Renard Truman Polk
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
4
(0) 1947A