Helfrich (Peter) v. Laxalt
This text of Helfrich (Peter) v. Laxalt (Helfrich (Peter) v. Laxalt) 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.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
PETER JASON HELFRICH, No. 71297 Appellant, vs. ADAM P. LAXALT; WARDEN; HIGH FILED DESERT STATE PRISON OFFENDER MANAGEMENT DIVISION; AND THE JUN 1 5 2017 STATE OF NEVADA, ELIZABETH A BROWN CLE OF SUPREME COURT Respondent& BY • 0 WY CLERK
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying appellant Peter Helfrich's June 28, 2016, postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. First Judicial District Court, Carson City; James Todd Russell, Judge. Helfrich challenged the computation of time he has served. We affirm. 1 Helfrich claimed that he was entitled to work credits pursuant to NRS 209.4465(2) because he was ready and willing to work. Helfrich did not claim that he performed work for which he was entitled to credits, and NRS 209.4465(2) requires prisoners to actually work to earn the credits. Accordingly, Helfrich did not demonstrate that he is entitled to the deduction of work credits. To the extent Helfrich claimed that the Nevada Department of Corrections is not deducting statutory credits from his minimum sentences pursuant to NRS 209.4465(7)(b), his claim appears to be moot. Helfrich had a parole-eligibility date of January 22, 2017, and he has not
'This appeal has been submitted for decision on the record without briefing or oral argument. NRAP 34(0(3), (g); see also NRAP 31(d)(1); Luckett v. Warden, 91 Nev. 681, 682, 541 P.2d 910, 911 (1975).
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
Art. (0) 19-17A 17 - 19 8(70 claimed that he was denied the parole hearing. Since a parole hearing would be the only relief available and no statutory authority or case law permits a retroactive grant of parole, see Niergarth v. Warden, 105 Nev. 26, 29, 768 P.2d 882, 884 (1989), his claim would be moot. See Johnson v. Dir., Nev. Dep't. of Prisons, 105 Nev. 314, 316, 774 P.2d 1047, 1049 (1989). Moreover, his claim lacks merit. NRS 209.4465(7) begins, "Except as otherwise provided in subsection[ ] 8," and NRS 209.4465(8) specifically excludes offenders convicted of category B felonies from deducting statutory credits from their minimum sentences. Helfrich was convicted of a category B felony, see NRS 200.080, for an offense committed after NRS 209.4465(8)'s effective date. Accordingly, he is not entitled to the deduction of credits from his minimum sentence. Having considered Helfrich's claims and concluding they are without merit, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
/c-LA tge-cr... \ J.
J. Stiglich
cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Peter Jason Helfrich Attorney General/Carson City Carson City Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Helfrich (Peter) v. Laxalt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/helfrich-peter-v-laxalt-nev-2017.