and the petitioner must demonstrate the underlying facts by a preponderance of the evidence, Means v. State, 120 Nev. 1001, 1012, 103 P.3d 25, 33 (2004). We give deference to the district court's factual findings regarding ineffective assistance of counsel 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). Appellant argues that counsel was ineffective because she delayed in interviewing the victim until after the victim moved to Oregon, thereby effectively depriving him of any investigation. Appellant failed to demonstrate deficiency or prejudice. Counsel testified at the evidentiary hearing that the defense needed to interview other witnesses before interviewing the victim, that the victim was ultimately interviewed days before trial, and that her version of events had not changed substantially from her testimony before the grand jury. Further, the district court's finding that appellant failed to present any evidence as to what specific information counsel could have obtained had she contacted the victim earlier is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, appellant failed to demonstrate a different outcome at trial had counsel attempted to contact the victim earlier. We therefore conclude the district court did not err in denying this claim, and we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

'OM Douglas Saitta SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge Story Law Group Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

ININEMINV , JeA. -