Opinion
No. 71078
03-23-2017
RICHARD DEEDS, Appellant, v. CONNIE S. BISBEE, CHAIRMAN; SUSAN JACKSON, COMMISSIONER; TONY CORDA, COMMISSIONER; ADAM ENDEL, COMMISSIONER; LUCILLE MONTERDE, COMMISSIONER; AND NEVADA BOARD OF PAROLE COMMISSIONERS, Respondents.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
Appellant Richard Deeds appeals from an order of the district court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, mandamus or prohibition filed on April 26, 2016. First Judicial District Court, Carson City; James Todd Russell, Judge.
This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument. NRAP 34(f)(3).
On appeal, Deeds argues the district court erred by denying his petition for mandamus or prohibition in which he challenged the Board of Parole Commissioners' (Board) decision to deny him parole. Deeds argued his due process rights were violated, his right to equal protection was violated, NRS 213.10885 constituted an ex-post facto law, and the Board abused its discretion when it denied him parole.
Deeds' claims were not cognizable in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus because Deeds was lawfully confined pursuant to a valid judgment of conviction, and Deeds' claims relating to parole do not demonstrate unlawful confinement. See NRS 34.360. Accordingly, we conclude the district court did not err in denying the habeas portion of the petition. --------
Our review of the record on appeal reveals the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Deeds' petition. See City of Reno v. Reno Gazette-Journal, 119 Nev. 55, 58, 63 P.3d 1147, 1148 (2003) (reviewing a district court's order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus for an abuse of discretion). Parole is an act of grace; a prisoner has no constitutional right to parole and there is no cause of action when parole has been denied. NRS 213.10705; Niergarth v. Warden, 105 Nev. 26, 28, 768 P.2d 882, 883 (1989); see also Severance v. Armstrong, 96 Nev. 836, 839, 620 P.2d 369, 370 (1980) (because a Nevada inmate has no legitimate expectation of parole release he has no "constitutionally cognizable liberty interest sufficient to invoke due process"). Therefore, Deeds fails to demonstrate he was entitled to relief for his claims. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Silver
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge
Richard Deeds
Attorney General/Carson City
Carson City Clerk