Case ID: nev_88/html/0553-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EDWARD HERBERT PARKUS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
    No. 6823
    October 18, 1972
    501 P.2d 1039
    
      Robert G. Legakes, Public Defender, and Michael A. Cherry, Deputy Public Defender, Clark County, for Appellant.
    
      
      Robert List, Attorney General, Roy A. Woof ter, District Attorney, and Charles L. Garner, Chief Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.
   OPINION

Per Curiam:

This appeal is without merit. Appellant claims that the wording of NRS 205.130(1), which states that one who passes checks with no account or insufficient funds “shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, unless such instrument, or a series of such instruments passed in the state during a period of 90 days, is in the amount of $100 or more, in which case such person shall be guilty of a felony. . . .”, is unconstitutionally vague.

It is appellant’s position that the statute fails to clearly indicate whether felony liability is imposed if one check is over $100 or when multiple checks totaled together exceed $100.

We find that men of ordinary intelligence would read this statute as imposing felony liability in either case. We therefore hold that NRS 205.130(1) is not vague and unconstitutional.

Affirmed.