Abdullah v. State

Decision Date14 February 2013
Docket NumberNo. 57818.,57818.
Citation129 Nev. Adv. Op. 7,294 P.3d 419
PartiesBilal ABDULLAH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
CourtNevada Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Sandra L. Stewart, Las Vegas, for Appellant.

Catherine Cortez Masto, Attorney General, Carson City; Steven Wolfson, District Attorney, and Steven S. Owens, Chief Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.

Before PICKERING, C.J., HARDESTY and SAITTA, JJ.

OPINION

By the Court, HARDESTY, J.:

In this appeal, we address the district court clerk's authority to prepare and file a notice of appeal on an appellant's behalf. We conclude that the district court clerk lacks authority to prepare and file a notice of appeal on an appellant's behalf unless authorized by statute or court rule. There are two relevant examples. First, NRS 177.075(2) authorizes the district court clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal on a criminal defendant's behalf when the defendant proceeded to trial without counsel and has requested an appeal after being advised of the right to appeal at sentencing. Second, NRAP 4(c) authorizes the district court clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal from a judgment of conviction on a criminal defendant's behalf when the district court directs the clerk to do so after finding that the defendant established a valid appeal-deprivation claim and is entitled to a direct appeal.

The district court clerk prepared and filed the notice of appeal in this case on appellant's behalf designating the notice of entry of the district court's order denying a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus, but the clerk lacked authority to do so because NRS 177.075(2) does not apply here and the notice does not comply with NRAP 4(c). As the notice of appeal does not specify the judgment of conviction and the district court clerk may not prepare and file a notice of appeal from the denial of a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus, we dismiss the appeal with instructions to the district court clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal on appellant's behalf from the judgment of conviction, as directed by the district court pursuant to NRAP 4(c).

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Appellant Bilal Abdullah pleaded guilty to one count of attempted robbery, and the district court entered a judgment of conviction on March 9, 2010. No appeal was filed from the judgment of conviction. Abdullah later filed a timely proper person post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he asserted, among other claims, that he asked counsel to file an appeal from the judgment of conviction and counsel refused to file the requested appeal. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the district court granted the petition in part, finding that Abdullah had been deprived of his right to a direct appeal due to ineffective assistance of counsel, see Toston v. State, 127 Nev. ––––, 267 P.3d 795 (2011); Lozada v. State, 110 Nev. 349, 871 P.2d 944 (1994), and ordered the district court clerk “to prepare and file a Notice of Appeal from the Judgment of Conviction and Sentence on Defendant's behalf.” SeeNRAP 4(c). The district court denied the remainder of Abdullah's claims. The court's written order was entered on January 14, 2011.

The district court clerk filed a notice of entry of the decision and order on February 24, 2011, as required under NRS 34.830(2) and (3). The same day, the district court clerk prepared and filed a notice of appeal on Abdullah's behalf. The notice of appeal designates “the Order entered in this action on February 24, 2011.”

DISCUSSION

Abdullah raises some issues that would be appropriate on appeal from the judgment of conviction and others that would be appropriate on appeal from the order denying in part his post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Although the State responds to the merits of all the issues raised by Abdullah, it also asserts that this court lacks jurisdiction to consider any issues related to the order denying in part the post-conviction petition because the district court clerk did not have authority to prepare and file a notice of appeal on Abdullah's behalf from that order and Abdullah failed to file a notice of appeal from that order. In Abdullah's reply, which this court ordered, he argues that as he was proceeding in proper person at the time that the district court clerk prepared and filed the notice of appeal, he should not be required to have known that he had to file his own notice of appeal from the order denying in part his post-conviction petition.

To resolve the jurisdictional issue presented, we first must determine whether the district court clerk had authority to prepare and file the notice of appeal on Abdullah's behalf. The decision to take an appeal rests squarely with the appellant. Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751, 103 S.Ct. 3308, 77 L.Ed.2d 987 (1983); see alsoNRS 177.075(2)-(3) (requiring notice of appeal to be signed by appellant, appellant's attorney, or district court clerk where defendant who proceeded to trial without counsel requests an appeal after being informed of the right to appeal when the court imposes the sentence); NRAP 3C(c) (“When an appellant elects to appeal from a district court order or judgment governed by this Rule, appellant's trial counsel shall serve and file a notice of appeal pursuant to applicable rules and statutes.”); NRAP 4(c)(1)(B)(iii) (providing district court clerk may file notice of appeal where petitioner has demonstrated that he was deprived of a direct appeal).1 The district court clerk is authorized to prepare and file a notice of appeal on a criminal defendant's behalf in two specific situations: (1) when a defendant “who has not pleaded guilty or guilty but mentally ill and who is without counsel has been informed at sentencing of his right to appeal and requests an appeal, NRS 177.075(2); and (2) when the district court finds that a post-conviction petitioner has demonstrated that he was deprived of his right to appeal from a judgment of conviction and orders the clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction as provided in NRAP 4(c)(1)(B)(i), (iii).

These provisions ensure that a notice of appeal from a judgment of conviction is prepared and filed on behalf of a defendant in two circumstances in which there is a significant risk that the right to appeal otherwise will be lost. In both instances in which the clerk has authority to prepare and file a notice of appeal from a judgment of conviction on a defendant's behalf, the defendant has asserted his right to appeal from the judgment of conviction. These provisions therefore are consistent with the notion that the defendant has the ultimate authority to decide whether to take such an appeal. No statute or court rule permits the district court clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal on a defendant's behalf in any other circumstance. In particular, NRS Chapter 34, which governs post-conviction habeas petitions and appeals therefrom, has no provision directing the court or clerk to prepare and file a notice of appeal on an aggrieved litigant's behalf.

Here, the notice of appeal was prepared and signed by the district court clerk on Abdullah's behalf. Because the district court clerk only has that authority in limited circumstances, we must determine whether any of those circumstances are present in this case. NRS 177.075(2) does not apply because Abdullah was represented by counsel and entered a guilty plea. Although NRAP 4(c) clearly applies because Abdullah filed a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that he was deprived of his right to a direct appeal and the district court found that that claim had merit and ordered the district court clerk to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • State v. Salgado, 75287-COA
    • United States
    • Nevada Court of Appeals
    • February 26, 2019
    ...the indictment in its notice of appeal, and therefore, we decline to review that ruling. See NRAP 3(c)(1)(B); Abdullah v. State, 129 Nev. 86, 90, 294 P.3d 419, 421 (2013). We also note that the State has not presented relevant authority or cogently argued why this court should reverse the d......
  • Mallios v. Bank of Am., N.A.
    • United States
    • Nevada Court of Appeals
    • October 31, 2019
    ...where the intent to appeal from a final judgment can be reasonably inferred and the respondent is not misled." Abdullah v. State, 129 Nev. 86, 90-91, 294 P.3d 419, 421 (2013) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted). Here, the respondents have not shown that they were misled as to......
  • Diaz v. State, 66589
    • United States
    • Nevada Court of Appeals
    • June 16, 2015
    ...to consider this argument. See NRAP 3(c)(1)(B); Harris v. State, 130 Nev. ___, ___, 329 P.3d 619, 627-28 (2014); Abdullah v. State, 129 Nev. ___, ___, 294 P.3d 419, 421 (2013). Having concluded Diaz is not entitled to relief, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. /s/_________, C.J. ......
  • Potter v. State
    • United States
    • Nevada Court of Appeals
    • October 19, 2016
    ...for a writ of habeas corpus, we lack jurisdiction to consider these claims and we take no action on them.See Abdullah v. State, 129 Nev. 86, 91-92, 294 P.3d 419, 422 (2013) (an "order that is not designated in the notice [of appeal] cannot be considered on appeal" and the district court cle......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT