Anderson (Dustin) v. State ( 2013 )

 NRS 207.010(1)(a). Anderson does not allege that the statutes imposing
punishment are unconstitutional, and we do not believe that the
punishment imposed is so grossly disproportionate to the crime and
Anderson's criminal history as to constitute cruel and unusual
punishment, see Blume v. 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 Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, 29 (2003) (plurality
opinion); Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 1000-01 (1991) (plurality
opinion). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion,
and we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 1
Hardesty
Parraguirre Cherry
cc: Hon. Doug Smith, District Judge
Cannon & Tannery
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
'The fast track statement and response do not comply with NRAP
3C(h)(1) and NRAP 32(a)(4) because the text is not double-spaced.
Counsel for both parties are cautioned that the failure to comply with the
formatting requirements in the future may result in the imposition of
sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A ^-