Court Opinion

ID: 9565939
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:30:31.309966+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:08.458928
License: Public Domain

Steffen, J.,
dissenting:
Respectfully, I dissent.
I do not agree that the State violated either the letter or the spirit of the negotiated plea in this case. At the entry of the plea, the State clearly stated that it would not argue for more than five years. Again, at sentencing, the deputy district attorney declared the State’s position as follows:
This was negotiated by Mr. Rick Smith of our office and pursuant to negotiations the State was allowed to argue, however, we are not allowed to argue for more than five years in Nevada State Prison and we are not to oppose concurrent time with the three years he is presently serving in case C82415. Therefore, pursuant to negotiations, the State would be recommending he be sentenced to five years in Nevada State Prison and that it be concurrent to his preceding case.
Although the deputy did state, in the course of her argument, that “I agree with the recommendation of the Department that his behavior merits sever [sic] sanctions and that he failed to be penalized in his wrongful behavior which has been continuous since 1978,” I do not consider the remarks to be in derogation of the clearly expressed position of the State. The statement relating to severe sanctions in the pre-sentence report was not contained in that part of the report concerning the Department’s recommendation. In fact, the comment was noted in connection with the observation that confinement was necessary to protect the community and to reinforce “any positive strides” that Wolf had taken.
The conditions of the plea bargain agreement permitted the State to argue. Because I believe the State’s argument was neither violative of the agreement nor prejudicial to Wolf, I respectfully dissent.