Guardado v. Inspector General

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: September 19, 2013
• Docket: 60594
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

833 F.2d 1316, 1318 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78 (1976)). And neither NRS 179A.150 (providing for the inspection and correction of information contained in an individual's record of criminal history) nor NRS 179A.160 (permitting the removal of certain criminal records from a party's criminal history when the party has been acquitted of a charge or has received a favorable disposition regarding the charge) creates such an interest. Thus, the district court correctly concluded that appellant could not state a due process claim with regard to his being labeled an escape risk, as appellant did not identify a liberty or property interest that he was deprived of as a result of this classification. See Pressler v. City of Reno, 118 Nev. 506, 510, 50 P.3d 1096, 1098 (2002) ("The protections of due process only attach when there is a deprivation of a protected property or liberty interest"); see also Walker v. Gomez, 370 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir. 2004) (recognizing that a prisoner does not have a property or liberty interest in prison employment under the due process clause); Hernandez, 833 F.2d at 1318 (explaining that a prisoner does not have a protected interest in his prison classification). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

Gibbons

\ouz ougas 1:)441

J. Saitta

2 cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Ernest Jord Guardado Attorney General/Carson City Carson City Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A