Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
John Christopher GREEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
Green argues the district court abused its discretion by sentencing him to a prison term greater than necessary. Specifically, Green argues the State improperly focused on his criminal history and the victim's physical injuries during the sentencing hearing and the district court arbitrarily imposed a minimum sentence greater than the State's recommendation.
The district court has wide discretion in its sentencing decision. See Houk v. State, 103 Nev. 659, 664, 747 P.2d 1376, 1379 (1987). Generally, this court 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); see Cameron v. State, 114 Nev. 1281, 1283, 968 P.2d 1169, 1171 (1998).
Green's sentence of 42 to 120 months in prison is within the parameters provided by the relevant statutes. See NRS 193.153(1)(a)(2) (previously NRS 193.330); NRS 200.380(2). And Green does not allege that the district court relied on impalpable or highly suspect evidence. Further, in entering his guilty plea, Green acknowledged that “the matter of sentencing is to be determined solely by the Court,” and thus, the district court's sentencing authority was not limited by the State's recommendation. Having considered the sentence and the crime, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing Green's sentence. Therefore, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.1
FOOTNOTES
1. To the extent Green contends that the State's sentencing argument was improper, Green did not raise this issue before the district court, and Green does not argue on appeal that it was plain error. Accordingly, we decline to consider this claim on appeal in the first instance. See Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. 46, 50, 412 P.3d 43, 48 (2018).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 84087-COA
Decided: August 10, 2022
Court: Court of Appeals of Nevada.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)