BERG v. STATE (2021)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Berg argues the district court abused its discretion at sentencing by considering a written victim impact statement that lacked the victim's handwritten signature. Berg argues that the lack of a handwritten signature renders the victim impact statement unreliable. “A district court is vested with wide discretion regarding sentencing,” and “[f]ew limitations are imposed on a judge's right to consider evidence in imposing a sentence.” Denson v. State, 112 Nev. 489, 492, 915 P.2d 284, 286 (1996). We will not interfere with a sentence imposed by the district court that falls within the parameters of relevant sentencing statutes “[s]o long as the record does not demonstrate prejudice resulting from consideration of information or accusations founded on facts supported only by impalpable or highly suspect evidence.” Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976).

Berg was sentenced to 60 to 150 months in prison for the attempted lewdness count and 48 to 120 months in prison for the statutory sexual seduction count. The sentences imposed are within the parameters provided by the relevant statutes. See NRS 200.368(1); NRS 201.230(2); MRS 193.330(1)(a)(1). Moreover, the record does support a finding that the evidence relied on by the district court was impalpable or highly suspect. And finally, Berg has not demonstrated prejudice where the district court imposed a sentence shorter than the 72 to 180 months that the State sought for the attempted lewdness charge. Having considered the sentences and the crimes, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Berg. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.