Rahman (Lusan) v. State

When reviewing the district court's resolution of an ineffective-assistance claim, we give deference to the court's factual findings if they are supported by substantial evidence and not clearly wrong but review the court's application of the law to those facts de novo. Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). Here, the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing, heard testimony from Rahman's trial counsel, and determined that counsel was not deficient and that Rahman failed to demonstrate prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996). The district court also found that appellate counsel was not ineffective, see Kirksey, 112 Nev. at 998, 923 P.2 at 1113-14. We conclude that the district court did not err by rejecting Rahman's ineffective-assistance claims, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

cc: Hon. David B. Barker, District Judge

Michael H. Schwarz

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF

NEVADA (0) 1947A ,1(1 &t:3 gklEa "-% .