ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge.

This court directed 28 U.S.C. § 2254 pro se petitioner Leland J. Bryant to show cause and demonstrate that this petition is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A) (ECF No. 5). The responses from both parties as well as the state-court record demonstrate that the petition is untimely.

The state district court filed Bryant's judgment of conviction on May 29, 2007 (exhibit 2).1 Bryant did not file a direct appeal. On March 30, 2016, almost nine years after the one-year statute of limitations had run, Bryant filed a state postconviction habeas corpus petition. Exh. 3. The Nevada Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the petition as procedurally barred on July 12, 2017. Exh. 11. Thus, this petition is untimely. Bryant fails to demonstrate that he is entitled to equitable tolling. He argues in his petition that the Nevada Revised Statutes are invalid and states that he and/or other inmates researched the issue for many years before filing this federal petition. This is insufficient to show diligence in pursuing his claims. The court also notes that his argument about the invalidity of the Nevada statutes is frivolous. In any event, the petition is dismissed as untimely.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition is DISMISSED with prejudice as untimely.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case.