Holmes v. Crawford
Holmes v. Crawford
Dissenting Opinion
Dissenting in part.
I would uphold the conviction but vacate the sanction.
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Nevada state prisoner Kevin Holmes appeals pro se the district court’s summary
Holmes’ contention that insufficient evidence supported his conviction lacks merit because the conviction was supported by “some evidence.” Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455-56, 105 S.Ct. 2768, 86 L.Ed.2d 356 (1985).
Holmes’ contention that prison officials misapplied state law by imposing a sanction for medical costs lacks merit because the sanction was permitted under Nev. Rev.Stat. § 209.246 and the Nevada Department of Prisons Code of Penal Discipline.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.