Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Nevada » Supreme Court » 2013 » ELMORE, JR. (LOHNY) VS. STATE
ELMORE, JR. (LOHNY) VS. STATE
State: Nevada
Court: Supreme Court
Docket No: 60306
Case Date: 01/16/2013
Plaintiff: ELMORE, JR. (LOHNY)
Defendant: STATE
Preview: the Blockburger test to redundancy claims when the relevant statutes do not expressly authorize or prohibit cumulative punishment). Second, Elmore claims that the district court relied upon impalpable or highly suspect evidence during sentencing by comparing his conduct to a gang-style drive-by shooting. However, the district court's comparison was not evidence and was not based on evidence, it was merely an analogy. Elmore has not shown that the district court relied upon impalpable or highly suspect evidence, see Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976), the relevant statutes are unconstitutional, see Blume v. State, 112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996), or the two 18- to 48-month prison terms exceed the parameters of the relevant statutes, see NRS 200.471(2)(b); NRS 202.285(1)(b). We are not convinced that the sentence violates the constitutional proscriptions against cruel and unusual punishment, see Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 100001 (1991) (plurality opinion); Blume, 112 Nev. at 475, 915 P.2d at 284, and we conclude that Elmore has failed to demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion at sentencing, see Chavez v. State, 125 Nev. 328, 348, 213 P.3d 476, 490 (2009). Third, Elmore claims that NRS 176A.290(2) is unconstitutional because it prohibits the district court from assigning a defendant who is guilty of committing a violent offense to the veteran's court unless the prosecuting attorney stipulates to the assignment. However, nothing in the record before this court demonstrates that Elmore sought and was denied treatment in a program for veterans pursuant to NRS 176A.290. Accordingly, we conclude that Elmore lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of this statute. See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992).

2

Having considered Elmore's contentions and concluded that he is not entitled to relief, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

J. Douglas Saitta

cc:

Chief Judge, Second Judicial District Court Hon. Robert E. Estes, Senior Judge Karla K. Butko Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

3

(0) 1947A

Download 60306.pdf

Nevada Law

Nevada State Laws
    > Nevada Gun Laws
    > Nevada Statutes
Nevada Tax
Nevada Labor laws
    > Nevada Unemployment Claims
Nevada Court
    > Nevada Appeal
Nevada Agencies
    > Nevada DMV

Comments

Tips