Bramlage (Jason) v. State

CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 19, 2014
Docket65418
StatusUnpublished

This text of Bramlage (Jason) v. State (Bramlage (Jason) v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bramlage (Jason) v. State, (Neb. 2014).

Opinion

of convictionl was entered on October 28, 2009, providing a sentence of 20 to 50 months. After a probation revocation hearing on May 17, 2013, a modified order admitting Bramlage to probation and fixing the terms of his probation was entered, again noting an underlying sentence of 12 to 36 months. Bramlage argues that his sentence was ambiguous and that he justifiably relied upon the sentence construction set forth in the probation agreement and the modified probation agreement. He asks this court to remand the case with instructions that the district court reinstate the modified sentence of 12 to 36 months. We have held that a judgment is final once it is 'signed by the judge and entered by the clerk." Miller v. Hayes, 95 Nev. 927, 929, 604 P.2d 117, 118 (1979) (quoting NRS 176.105(3)). Here, the district court entered the judgment of conviction on October 28, 2009, in which Bramlage was sentenced to a term of 20 to 50 months, that term was suspended, and Bramlage was placed on probation. The documents referenced by Bramlage, both prepared by the Division of Parole and Probation and not the district court, merely set forth the terms of his probation. While the documents were signed by the district court, they were not judgments of conviction nor did they modify Bramlage's sentence. Furthermore, at the first probation revocation hearing on May 17, 2013, the district court reiterated Bramlage's underlying sentence of 20 to 50 months before reinstating his probation. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing the underlying sentence of 20 to 50 months upon later revoking his probation. See MRS 176A.630

We note that the district court entitled Bramlage's judgment of conviction a Judgment and Sentence.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A (identifying actions the court may take upon determining probationer violated a term of probation). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

, J. Hardesty

D117,1 - Douglas J.

J. Cherry

cc: Hon. Gary Fairman, District Judge State Public Defender/Ely State Public Defender/Carson City Attorney General/Carson City Eureka County District Attorney Eureka County Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Miller v. Hayes
604 P.2d 117 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bramlage (Jason) v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bramlage-jason-v-state-nev-2014.