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.
THOMAS NEVIUS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
This is a pro se appeal from a district court order dismissing a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Monica Trujillo, Judge.
Appellant Thomas Nevius filed a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus in district court, requesting compassionate release from prison. Nevius also filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. The district court summarily dismissed Nevius's petition, finding that a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus is not the appropriate vehicle for a prisoner to request compassionate release. Consequently, the court also denied Nevius's motion for the appointment of counsel. We agree with the district court.
The Nevada Department of Corrections maintains a program for compassionate release. NRS 209.3925. An incarcerated individual who is physically incapacitated, in ill health, or terminally ill may submit a request for residential confinement to the director of the Department of Corrections. NRS 209.3925(1), (2). The director has exclusive discretionary authority to approve such a release, and “[a]n offender does not have a right” to compassionate release. NRS 209.3925(1), (8). The courts are not involved in this process.
A postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus serves to challenge the constitutionality of a defendant's conviction or sentence or to challenge the computation of time that person has served. NRS 34.724(1). Nevius did not raise any such claims in the petition. Thus, the district court properly determined that a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus was not the correct vehicle for the relief Nevius sought and summarily dismissed the petition. Accordingly, the district court also did not err in denying Nevius's motion for the appointment of counsel. See NRS 34.750(1) (“If ․ the petition is not dismissed summarily, the court may appoint counsel to represent the petitioner.”) (emphasis added). Therefore, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Herndon, C.J.
Bell, J.
Stiglich, J.
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. 90364
Decided: August 15, 2025
Court: Supreme Court 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)