Vossv.State

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADAJun 11, 2019
No. 76211-COA (Nev. App. Jun. 11, 2019)

No. 76211-COA

06-11-2019

STEVEN FLOYD VOSS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Steven Floyd Voss appeals from a second corrected amended judgment of conviction. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Jerome M. Polaha, Judge.

This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument. NRAP 34(f)(3). To the extent Voss has attempted to present claims or facts in his brief and supporting documents which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we decline to consider them in the first instance.

First, Voss argues the district court lacked the authority to amend the judgment of conviction. The district court found Voss' judgment of conviction contained a clerical error because it did not identify whether he had been convicted of first- or second-degree murder. The district court found Voss had been convicted of first-degree murder and the failure of the judgment of conviction to specify the degree of murder amounted to a clerical error. As a result, the district court entered the second corrected amended judgment of conviction, clarifying that Voss had been convicted of first-degree murder.

"Clerical mistakes in judgments, orders or other parts of the record and errors in the record arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time." NRS 176.565. The record reveals the jury found Voss guilty of first-degree murder and the sentencing court sentenced Voss to serve a prison term for first-degree murder. Because the record demonstrated Voss had been found guilty of first-degree murder, the district court appropriately found failure to include the degree of murder in the judgment of conviction was a clerical error and properly corrected such a clerical error pursuant to NRS 176.565. Therefore, Voss is not entitled to relief.

Voss argues the district court erred by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing before entering the second corrected amended judgment of conviction. However, the district court may correct clerical errors "at any time," NRS 176.565, and need not conduct an evidentiary hearing to do so. Therefore, Voss is not entitled to relief.
In addition, Voss appears to raise claims challenging the validity of his conviction. However, these challenges do not arise from the amendment made in the second corrected amended judgment of conviction and, therefore, are not properly raised in this appeal. See Jackson v. State, 133 Nev., Adv. Op. 106, at * 45, 410 P.3d 1004, 1006 (Ct. App. 2017).

Second, Voss argues the district court erred by denying two motions that he filed after entry of the second corrected amended judgment of conviction. Because these claims challenge events that occurred after the second corrected amended judgment of conviction was entered, they are not properly raised in this appeal and we decline to consider them. See NRS 177.015(3); NRS 177.045. Accordingly, we

ORDER the second corrected amended judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Voss also contends the district court failed to timely serve him with the second corrected amended judgment of conviction. Voss did not demonstrate he was prejudiced by any delay because he timely filed a notice of appeal following entry of the second corrected amended judgment of conviction. --------

/s/_________, C.J.


Gibbons /s/_________, J.
Tao /s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. Jerome M. Polaha, District Judge


Steven Floyd Voss


Attorney General/Carson City


Washoe County District Attorney


Washoe District Court Clerk