Opinion ID: 1255705
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Modifying Ford's Sentence.

Text: Finally, Ford requests this court to revisit its power to evaluate the evidence in her case and, in light of her mental fluctuations between competency and incompetency, modify Ford's sentence to one of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Ford notes this court's remark that a just and better course would have been to secure the defendant's permanent sequestration. Ford, 102 Nev. at 138 n. 8, 717 P.2d at 34-35. Ford refers to this court's recognition that the State will continually incur the expenses associated with finding the point at which Mrs. Ford will be competent to receive her decreed punishment. Moreover, Ford asserts that [t]his process will continue as long as the death sentence in this case exists. We acknowledge our recognition that this case was not among the brightest stars in the judicial firmament. Id. We nevertheless concluded, as we do now, that defendant's sentence of death is not excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases in this State, considering both the crime and the defendant ... [and that] it is not for this Court to diminish her punishment because of a conflict in the evidence regarding defendant's mental deficiencies. Id. at 137, 717 P.2d at 34-35 (footnote omitted). We perceive no basis for reconsidering our previous holding. Therefore, we deny Ford's request for a reduction in her imposed sentence. [5] We have considered all other arguments raised in the parties' briefs and during oral argument, and conclude that they are without merit. [6]