Washington (Brandon) v. State

State, 112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996) (quoting CuIverson 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 that 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). The district court reviewed Washington's extensive criminal history, the bench warrant issued for his failure to appear, and his prior failed attempt at drug rehabilitation. Having considered the sentence and the crime, we are not convinced that the district court's imposition of a 12 to 34 month prison sentence is so grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offense and Washington's history of recidivism as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Further, Washington's sentence falls within the relevant sentencing parameters, see NRS 193.130(2)(d); NRS 193.330(4); NRS 205.0835(3), and Washington does not allege that those statutes are unconstitutional. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, and we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

cc: Hon. Carolyn Ellsworth, District Judge

Clark County Public Defender

Attorney GenerallCarson City

Clark County District Attorney

Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF

NEVADA (0) 1947A eo