Washington (Brandon) v. State ( 2014 )

 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
2
(0) 1947A eo