From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vang v. State

Court of Appeals of Nevada.
Jan 20, 2022
502 P.3d 186 (Nev. App. 2022)

Opinion

No. 83464-COA

01-20-2022

Vong VANG, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Kristine L. Brown Attorney General/Carson City Douglas County District Attorney/Minden


Kristine L. Brown

Attorney General/Carson City

Douglas County District Attorney/Minden

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

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 , 112 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(l)(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.


Summaries of

Vang v. State

Court of Appeals of Nevada.
Jan 20, 2022
502 P.3d 186 (Nev. App. 2022)
Case details for

Vang v. State

Case Details

Full title:Vong VANG, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

Court:Court of Appeals of Nevada.

Date published: Jan 20, 2022

Citations

502 P.3d 186 (Nev. App. 2022)