GUNTER v. STATE, 95 Nev. 319 (1979)

594 P.2d 708

DWAYNE LEE GUNTER, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, RESPONDENT.

No. 10351Supreme Court of Nevada.
May 9, 1979

Appeal from Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Joseph S. Pavlikowski, Judge.

Jaquette Kilpatrick, Carson City, for Appellant.

Richard H. Bryan, Attorney General, Carson City, and Robert J. Miller, District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.

Page 320

OPINION
Per Curiam:

Appellant stands convicted of perjury. Appellant’s direct appeal from such conviction was dismissed, because notice of appeal was not timely filed. By petition for post-conviction relief, NRS 177.315, et seq., appellant contends his constitutional rights have been violated, NRS 177.315(1), because his request for counsel to prosecute his appeal was not honored, and that therefore, also, there was good cause for his failure to present three significant issues by direct appeal. See NRS 177.375(2)(b).

The district court erroneously held it lacked jurisdiction to consider appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief. One issue appellant sought to raise was incompetency of his trial counsel. Even had appellant failed, through his own omission, to raise this issue on direct appeal, the district court would have had jurisdiction to consider it, in the exercise of its discretion. Warden v. Lischko, 90 Nev. 221, 222-223, 523 P.2d 6, 7 (1974). Here, however, it conclusively appears that, although appellant made known his desire to do so, he was not afforded an opportunity to present his various complaints to this court, through counsel, on direct appeal. Although counsel ultimately was appointed, and filed a belated notice of appeal, this court dismissed such appeal for want of jurisdiction.

In these circumstances, we consider that appellant has alleged the denial of a constitutional right, pursuant to NRS 177.315 and 177.320. Cf. Warden v. Lischko, supra. Post-conviction relief in this case is not premature since a direct appeal is not pending nor any longer available. See Wehrheim v. State, 84 Nev. 477, 443 P.2d 607 (1968); NRS 177.315(2). Moreover, because he was denied right to counsel until after expiration of time to appeal, appellant has established a categorical excuse, under NRS 177.375(2), which also elevates to constitutional dimension the effect of any error which might have occurred and would have been grounds for relief on appeal.

The judgment of the district court, denying appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief, is therefore reversed, with

Page 321

instructions to examine the merits of all issues to which appellant’s petition alludes, and which might have been raised by direct appeal, if appellate counsel had been timely appointed.

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 594 P.2d 708

Recent Posts

KAPLAN v. DUTRA, 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 80 (2016)

No. 69065. 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 80 DAVID JOHN KAPLAN, Appellant, v. CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE,…

9 years ago

MAYO v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 79 (2016)

No. 69566. 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 79 ANTHONY MAYO, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT…

9 years ago

PACIFIC WESTERN BANK v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 78 (2016)

No. 69048. 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 78 PACIFIC WESTERN BANK, A CALIFORNIA BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioner,…

9 years ago

BOWMAN v. STATE, 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 74 (2016)

No. 67656. 132 Nev. Adv. Opn. 74 FREDRICK LEWIS BOWMAN, A/K/A FREDERICK LEWIS BOWMAN, Appellant,…

9 years ago

WILLIAMS v. STATE, 118 Nev. 1159 (2002)

106 P.3d 1269 DARRYL WILLIAMS v. STATE. No. 39177.Supreme Court of Nevada. May 09, 2002.…

9 years ago

LARA v. DIST. CT., 122 Nev. 1697 (2006)

Lara v. District Court. No. 46284.Supreme Court of Nevada. March 24, 2006. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This…

9 years ago