this court with a copy of the petition filed below,' see NRAP 30(b)(3) (appellant's appendix shall include all "portions of the record essential to determination of issues raised in appellant's appeal"), we cannot say that the district court erred by denying the petition without first conducting an evidentiary hearing, see NRS 34.770(2). We conclude that Barrett has failed to demonstrate that she is entitled to relief, and we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

Pickering

Parraguirre r —Clajta Saitta

3Barrett's appendix includes a "Statement of Facts." This document does not bear a district court file stamp, see NRAP 30(c)(1), and it is not clear that this document was part of the post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court. Assuming that this document was included in the petition filed below and accurately identifies the issues raised, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying the petition without first conducting an evidentiary hearing. See Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 58-59 (1985); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987-88, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996).

2Appellant's appendix does not include all documents required under NRAP 30(b)(2). We caution appellant's counsel, Michael C. Novi, that future failure to comply with this court's rules when filing documents may result in the imposition of sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A (94IP4(9 cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Michael C. Novi Attorney General/Carson City Carson City District Attorney Carson City Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) I947A