From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richards v. State

Court of Appeals of Nevada
Jan 25, 2024
No. 86931-COA (Nev. App. Jan. 25, 2024)

Opinion

86931-COA

01-25-2024

COREY DOUGLAS RICHARDS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Gibbons C.J.

Corey Douglas Richards appeals from a "second order reinstating probation with added conditions." Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Kimberly A. Wanker, Judge.

Richards argues the district court imposed an illegal sentence when it ordered him to serve a flat 364 days in jail as an added condition of his probation. Richards contends the jail term is illegal because it would require him to serve a total of 905 days (including credit for time previously served), and he would have been eligible for parole "at the maximum latest once he served 720 days" if he had served the underlying sentence.

Generally, a party cannot complain on appeal about an error "which he himself induced or provoked the court ... to commit." Pearson v. Pearson, 110 Nev. 293, 297, 871 P.2d 343, 345 (1994) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. 46, 52, 412 P.3d 43, 50 (2018); Breault v. State, 116 Nev. 311, 314, 996 P.2d 888, 889 (2000) (declining to interfere with the sentences imposed, despite the appellant's claim that his sentences were illegal, where the appellant agreed to the sentences imposed and waived any defects associated with his sentences). Here, Richards specifically requested at the June 8, 2023, probation violation hearing that his probation be reinstated and that the district court impose the now-contested jail term as an added condition of his probation. As such, we conclude that Richards invited any error associated with the jail term, and we decline to consider this claim on appeal.

Richards also argues that the district court's sentence violates the Separation of Powers Clause of the Nevada Constitution. Richards fails to support this claim with relevant authority or cogent argument; therefore, we also decline to consider this claim on appeal. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987). Accordingly, we

ORDER the second order reinstating probation with added conditions AFFIRMED.

Bulla J., Westbrook J.

Hon. Kimberly A. Wanker, District Judge


Summaries of

Richards v. State

Court of Appeals of Nevada
Jan 25, 2024
No. 86931-COA (Nev. App. Jan. 25, 2024)
Case details for

Richards v. State

Case Details

Full title:COREY DOUGLAS RICHARDS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

Court:Court of Appeals of Nevada

Date published: Jan 25, 2024

Citations

No. 86931-COA (Nev. App. Jan. 25, 2024)