Opinion
83464-COA
01-20-2022
VONG VANG, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
Vong Vang appeals from a judgment of conviction, entered pursuant to a guilty plea, of attempt to obtain and use personal identifying information of another person to avoid or delay prosecution. Ninth Judicial District Court, Douglas County; Thomas W. Gregory, Judge.
Vang claims his sentence amounts to cruel and unusual punishment because it makes no measurable contribution to the goals of punishment and is grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime.
Regardless of its severity, "[a] sentence 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, 1.12 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 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).
Vang's sentence of 364 days in county jail is within the parameters provided by the relevant statutes, see NRS 193.330(1)(a)(4); NRS 205.463(2), and Vang does not allege that those statutes are unconstitutional. We conclude the sentence imposed is not grossly disproportionate to the crime and does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
Gibbons, C.J., Tao, J., Bulla, J.
Hon. Thomas W. Gregory, District Judge