From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martinez v. Williams

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Aug 16, 2017
No. 71860 (Nev. App. Aug. 16, 2017)

Opinion

No. 71860

08-16-2017

JOSE M. MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. BRIAN WILLIAMS, WARDEN, Respondent.


ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Jose M. Martinez appeals from a district court order denying the postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus he filed on June 16, 2016. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Linda Marie Bell, Judge.

This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument. NRAP 34(f)(3).

In his petition, Martinez claimed the Nevada Department of Corrections was not applying the statutory credits he had earned to his minimum sentence as required by NRS 209.4465(7)(b). The district court determined Martinez was not entitled to good time credit deductions from his parole eligibility date because he was serving sentences based on category B felonies.

Martinez appears to claim the district court erred in its interpretation of NRS 209.4465. We have reviewed the statute and conclude the district court correctly determined Martinez was not entitled to have credits deducted from his minimum sentences because he committed his crimes after NRS 209.4465 was amended in 2007 and NRS 209.4465(8)(d) excludes category B felons like Martinez from receiving credit toward their minimum sentence. See NRS 199.480(1); NRS 200.380(2); 2007 Nev. Stat., ch. 525, §, 5, at 3177; see generally Robert E. v. Justice Court of Reno Twp., Washoe Cnty., 99 Nev. 443, 445, 664 P.2d 957, 959 (1983) ("When presented with a question of statutory interpretation, the intent of the legislature is the controlling factor and, if the statute under consideration is clear on its face, a court cannot go beyond the statute in determining legislative intent."). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

To the extent Martinez also raises ex post facto, due process, and equal protection claims, we decline to address these claims because they were not raised in his habeas petition or considered by the district court in the first instance. See Davis v. State, 107 Nev. 600, 606, 817 P.2d 1169, 1173 (1991), overruled on other grounds by Means v. State, 120 Nev. 1001, 103 P.3d 25 (2003). --------

/s/_________, C.J.

Silver

/s/_________, J.

Tao

/s/_________, J.

Gibbons cc: Hon. Linda Marie Bell, District Judge

Jose M. Martinez

Attorney General/Carson City

Attorney General/Las Vegas

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

Martinez v. Williams

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Aug 16, 2017
No. 71860 (Nev. App. Aug. 16, 2017)
Case details for

Martinez v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:JOSE M. MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. BRIAN WILLIAMS, WARDEN, Respondent.

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Aug 16, 2017

Citations

No. 71860 (Nev. App. Aug. 16, 2017)