From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ngaue v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Sep 19, 2013
No. 62967 (Nev. Sep. 19, 2013)

Opinion

No. 62967

2013-09-19

RICKY JAMES NGAUE, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is a proper person appeal from an order of the district court denying a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Adriana Escobar, Judge.

This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument, NRAP 34(f)(3), and we conclude that the record is sufficient for our review and briefing is unwarranted. See Luckett v. Warden, 91 Nev. 681, 682, 541 P.2d 910, 911 (1975).

In his petition filed on October 6, 2009, appellant claimed that NRS 209.4465(8) violated the Equal Protection Clause. We conclude that the district court did not err in rejecting this argument as appellant was not a member of a suspect class, and there is a rational basis for treating more serious offenders differently from less serious offenders when applying credits that accelerate parole eligibility dates. See Gaines v. State, 116 Nev. 359, 371, 998 P.2d 166, 173 (2000) (recognizing that the first step in an equal-protection analysis is to determine the level of scrutiny to be applied, that strict-scrutiny analysis is only applied in cases involving fundamental rights or cases involving suspect classes, and that under a lesser standard of review, legislation will be upheld if the challenged classification is rationally related to a legitimate government interest); see also Graziano v. Pataki, 689 F.3d 110, 117 (2d Cir. 2012) (recognizing that prisoners, whether in the aggregate or specified by-offense, are not a suspect class and rational basis test will apply) (citation omitted); Glauner v. Miller, 184 F.3d 1053, 1054 (9th Cir. 1999) (recognizing that prisoners are not a suspect class and applying rational basis test). Appellant's separation-of-powers challenge to this statutory provision was patently without merit and based upon a misunderstanding of the separation-of-powers doctrine. Accordingly, we

Remarkably, and contrary to appellant's implicit argument, appellant was not similarly situated to offenders who committed less serious offenses.

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.
--------

______________________, J.

Gibbons

______________________, J.

Douglas

______________________, J.

Saitta
cc: Hon. Adriana Escobar, District Judge

Ricky James Ngaue

Attorney General/Las Vegas

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

Ngaue v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Sep 19, 2013
No. 62967 (Nev. Sep. 19, 2013)
Case details for

Ngaue v. State

Case Details

Full title:RICKY JAMES NGAUE, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Sep 19, 2013

Citations

No. 62967 (Nev. Sep. 19, 2013)