Here, the district court considered appellant's claims without regard to the procedural bars. See State V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Riker), 121 Nev. 225, 231, 112 P.3d 1070, 1074 (2005) ("Application of the statutory procedural default rules to post-conviction habeas petitions is mandatory."). As discussed in Harris, the district court should have construed appellant's motion as a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus and then permitted appellant a reasonable time period to cure any defects with respect to the procedural requirements of MRS Chapter 34. See 130 Nev. at , 329 P.3d at 628. We reverse the decision of the district court and remand for the district court to construe the motion as a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus and to provide appellant an opportunity to cure any defects within a reasonable time period as set by the district court. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order. 2

iP":14e.ditt J.

Pickering

— OW tk—e-e -T—J-..

Parraguirrp

J.

Saitta This order constitutes our final disposition of this appeal. Any subsequent appeal shall be docketed as a new matter.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge Jose Perez-Ruiz Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A