Hooper (David) v. Warden ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
    DAVID OWENS HOOFER,                                   No. 69107
    Appellant,
    vs.
    RENEE BAKER, WARDEN,                                       FILED
    Respondent.                                                 JUN 1 7 2016
    ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
    This is a pro se appeal from a district court order dismissing a
    postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.' Seventh Judicial
    District Court, White Pine County; Steve L. Dobrescu, Judge.
    Appellant David Owens Hooper argues that the district court
    erred in dismissing his postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
    The district court dismissed the petition because this court had reversed
    Hooper's judgment of conviction, see Hooper v. State, Docket No. 63027
    (NIarch 26, 2015), such that there was no conviction or sentence from
    which habeas relief could be granted.    See NRS 34.720 (setting forth the
    scope of petitions for postconviction habeas relief). Having reviewed the
    'Having considered the pro se brief filed by appellant, we conclude
    that a response is not necessary. NRAP 46A(c). This appeal therefore has
    been submitted for decision based on the pro se brief and the record. See
    NRAP 34(0(3).
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    (0) 1947A
    record, we agree that postconviction relief is not warranted. 2 Accordingly,
    we
    ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 3
    J.
    J.
    CC:   Hon. Steve L. Dobrescu, District Judge
    David Owens Hooper
    Attorney General/Carson City
    White Pine County District Attorney
    Attorney General/Ely
    White Pine County Clerk
    2 Even construing the petition as seeking pretrial relief, we note that
    relief would not be warranted because (1) a challenge asserting a lack of
    probable cause must be filed in a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas
    corpus within 21 days of the petitioner's first appearance in district court,
    see NRS 34.700(1)(a), and Hooper did not file the underlying petition until
    more than 2 years after his first appearance and (2) Hooper's double
    jeopardy claim lacks merit, as double jeopardy does not bar retrial when a
    defendant is retried following the reversal and remand of a prior
    conviction, see Collier v. State, 
    103 Nev. 563
    , 565, 
    747 P.2d 225
    , 226
    (1987).
    3 We   deny Hooper's request for publication. See NRAP 36(c).
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) 1947A mettr,
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 69107

Filed Date: 6/17/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021