Hill (Angela) v. State

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: June 12, 2014
• Docket: 64831
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

We review a district court's sentencing determination for an abuse of discretion, Parrish v. State, 116 Nev. 982, 989, 12 P.3d 953, 957 (2000), and will refrain from interfering with the sentence imposed by the district court "[slip long as the record does not demonstrate prejudice resulting from consideration of information or accusations founded on facts supported only by impalpable or highly suspect evidence," Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976). Regardless of its severity, a sentence that is within the statutory limits is not 'cruel and unusual punishment unless the statute fixing punishment is unconstitutional or the sentence is so unreasonably disproportionate to the offense as to shock the conscience." Blume v. State, 112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996) (quoting Culverson v. State, 95 Nev. 433, 435, 596 P.2d 220, 221-22 (1979)); see also Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 1000-01 (1991) (plurality opinion) (explaining that the Eighth Amendment does not require strict proportionality between crime and sentence; it forbids only an extreme sentence that is grossly disproportionate to the crime). Further, the district court is not required to accept the recommendations of P&P. See Lloyd v. State, 94 Nev. 167, 170, 576 P.2d 740, 742 (1978). As the victim was returning to her vehicle, Hill confronted the victim, allegedly at gunpoint, and abducted the victim. Hill drove off in the victim's car with the victim inside. Although the victim was ultimately able to force Hill out of the car and escape, the victim was shot in the head during the escape. Hill's sentence falls within the relevant sentencing parameters, see NRS 200.320(2)(b); NRS 200.380(2); NRS 205.060(2), and Hill does not allege that the statutes are unconstitutional. Moreover, our review of the record reveals no indication that the district

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A ue court based its sentencing decision solely on Hill's apparent lack of remorse. Having considered the sentence and the severity of the crimes, we are not convinced that the sentence imposed is so grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offenses as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment, and we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment Of conviction AFFIRMED.'

Pickering

VeW-rce-C, J. Parraguirre Saitta

cc: Hon. Nancy L. Porter, District Judge Elko County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Elko County District Attorney Elko County Clerk

'Footnote 1 of the fast track statement is not in the same size font as the body of the brief as required by NRAP 32(a)(5). We caution Hill's counsel that future failure to comply with the rules of this court may result in the imposition of sanctions. NRAP 3C(n).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A Cr.