that the district court did not err in denying the petition as procedurally barred. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

J.

Hardesty

P C1.4.)t Parraguirre J.

CHERRY, J., dissenting: The district court denied the petition without having the State respond to the petition and without providing appellant an opportunity to provide cause for the delay. While the district court may summarily deny a petition for being successive, see NRS 34.745(4), nothing in NRS chapter expressly permits the district court to summarily deny an untimely petition. Rather, NRS 34.745(1) requires the district court judge to order We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A the State to file a response or answer to the petition. I would reverse the denial of the petition and remand to provide appellant an opportunity to demonstrate cause for the delay, particularly in light of the very minimal delay in filing—six days.

cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge Bernabi Isiordia Bermudez Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A