From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Risser v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Jul 15, 2011
373 P.3d 955 (Nev. 2011)

Opinion

No. 57438.

07-15-2011

Robert RISSER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney


Clark County Public Defender

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of burglary. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Donald M. Mosley, Judge.

Appellant Robert Risser contends that the district court abused its discretion at sentencing and imposed a sentence constituting cruel and unusual punishment because the loss to the victim was financial in nature only and the presentence investigation report (PSI) contained inaccuracies regarding his criminal history. We disagree.

Risser's sentence of 10–25 years in prison is within the statutory limits, see NRS 207.010(1)(b)(3), he does not assert that the relevant statute is unconstitutional, and we conclude the sentence is not so disproportionate to the crime and Risser's criminal history “as to shock the conscience,” Blume v. State, 112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). It is within the district court's discretion to decline to adjudicate a defendant as a habitual criminal, see NRS 207.010(2) ; O'Neill v. State, 123 Nev. 9, 12, 153 P.3d 38, 40 (2007). And Risser has failed to demonstrate that the district court relied on “impalpable or highly suspect evidence,” see Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976), because the district court did not rely on the prior convictions challenged by Risser at the sentencing hearing and Risser does not specify what inconsistencies existed or provide this court with documentation regarding the alleged inconsistencies. Accordingly, we conclude that the sentence imposed does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment and the district court did not abuse its discretion at sentencing, see Houk v. State, 103 Nev. 659, 664, 747 P.2d 1376, 1379 (1987), and we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Risser v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Jul 15, 2011
373 P.3d 955 (Nev. 2011)
Case details for

Risser v. State

Case Details

Full title:Robert RISSER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada.

Date published: Jul 15, 2011

Citations

373 P.3d 955 (Nev. 2011)