him access to the court insofar as a number of documents and motions submitted by him in a separate appeal, Reberger v. State, Docket No. 60210, were received by this court, but were never actually filed or considered. Although a number of items submitted by petitioner in that case were entered on the docket as "received," rather than "filed," the order of affirmance entered on December 12, 2012, indicates that each of the documents submitted by petitioner was considered, but that this court concluded that relief was not warranted. See Reberger, Docket No. 60210 (Order of Affirmance, December 12, 2012). Thus, petitioner has not demonstrated that he was denied access to this court or that NRAP 46(b) is otherwise unconstitutional.

Accordingly, we deny these petitions. See NRAP 21(b)(1); Pan, Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844.

It is so ORDERED.

Hardesty

Parraguirre

cc: Lance Reberger Attorney General/Carson City

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) I947A