evidence and are not clearly wrong but review the court's application of 

the law to those facts de novo. Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 

P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). 

First, Bailey claims that trial counsel was ineffective for 

failing to communicate with Bailey and for failing to investigate the 

charges. At the evidentiary hearing, Bailey testified that he had concerns 

regarding the plea agreement that he wanted to discuss with counsel but 

that he was unable to communicate with counsel until after he entered his 

plea, as counsel's associate appeared with Bailey for the plea. Bailey 

further testified that counsel failed to investigate prior incidents of false 

reporting by the victim and investigate a possible alibi.' The district court 

concluded that counsel's actions fell below an objective standard of 

reasonableness but that Bailey failed to demonstrate prejudice. The 

district court's factual findings are supported by the record and are not 

clearly wrong. We conclude that the district court did not err by denying 

this claim. 

Second, Bailey claims that trial counsel was ineffective for 

failing to file an appeal from his judgment of conviction. At the 

evidentiary hearing, Bailey testified that he attempted to contact counsel 

shortly after sentencing to discuss a motion to withdraw the plea. Bailey 

then attempted to file his own motion to withdraw the plea and later a 

'Bailey's counsel did not testify at the evidentiary hearing. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A 
motion to dismiss counsel, in which Bailey asserted that he asked counsel 

several times to take action to enforce the plea agreement or to pursue 

another remedy. The district court concluded that counsel's actions fell 

below an objective standard of reasonableness but that Bailey failed to 

demonstrate prejudice. 

Based upon our review of the record on appeal, we conclude 

that the district court erred in denying this claim. Trial counsel has a 

duty to file a direct appeal when a client requests one or when the client 

expresses dissatisfaction with his conviction and sentence. See Toston v. 

State, 127 Nev. „ 267 P.3d 795, 800 (2011). The district court 

concluded that counsel's performance was deficient, given Bailey's 

expressed dissatisfaction with his conviction and sentence. We agree, and 

because prejudice is presumed, see id. at 267 P.3d at 799, Bailey 

demonstrated that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Thus we 

reverse the district court's denial of this claim and remand this matter to 

the district court to provide Bailey with the remedy set forth in NRAP 

4(c)(1)(B). 2Accordingly, we 

2The district court shall enter specific findings of fact and 

conclusions of law that Bailey was deprived of a direct appeal and is 

entitled to a direct appeal with the assistance of counsel See NRAP 

4(c)(1)(B)(i). If Bailey is indigent, the district court shall appoint appellate 

counsel See NRAP 4(c)(1)(B)(ii). The district court shall also direct the 

clerk of the district court to prepare and file within 5 days of entry of the 

district court's order a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction 

and sentence. See NRAP 4(c)(1)(B)(iii). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(0) 1947A 
J. 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED IN 

PART AND REVERSED IN PART AND REMAND this matter to the 

district court for proceedings consistent with this order. 

tj 

Hardesty 

Douglas 

J. 

J. 

cc: Hon. Jessie Elizabeth Walsh, District Judge 

Law Offices of Martin Hart, LLC 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 4 

(0) 1947A