default rules barring an untimely or successive petition. See Clem v. State, 119 Nev. 615, 621, 81 P.3d 521, 526 (2003). Appellant's petition was not procedurally barred. We therefore conclude that no relief is warranted. Appellant also argues that the district court erred by denying his claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising a claim of actual innocence on appeal. As explained above, actual innocence is not appropriately raised on direct appeal and therefore appellate counsel was not deficient for failing to seek relief on that basis. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 998, 923 P.2d 1102, 1114 (1996) (concluding that to show ineffective assistance under Strickland, a defendant must show deficient performance and that omitted issue had reasonable probability of success on appeal). To the extent that appellant's claim may be construed as challenging appellate counsel's failure to contest the sufficiency of the evidence based on the photographic lineup and appellant's identity, we conclude that his claim lacks merit considering the record before us. Therefore no relief is warranted. Having considered appellant's arguments and concluded that they lack merit, we ORDER the judgment • the district court AFFIRMED. 240°

ibbons

J J. Saitta

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A

NE cc: Hon. Linda Marie Bell, District Judge Kristina M. Wildeveld Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

I P5MIPX.,.-t*. • - :7WFMriM'