Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 213 - PARDONS AND PAROLES; REMISSIONS OF FINES AND COMMUTATIONS OF PUNISHMENTS

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.10885

Board to adopt standards for granting or revocation of parole; sample form regarding probability of success on parole to be made available to public; review of effectiveness of standards; report to Legislature

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 213.10885  Board to adopt standards for granting or revocation of parole; sample form regarding probability of success on parole to be made available to public; review of effectiveness of standards; report to Legislature.

      1.  The Board shall adopt by regulation specific standards for each type of convicted person to assist the Board in determining whether to grant or revoke parole. The regulations must include standards for determining whether to grant or revoke the parole of a convicted person:

      (a) Who committed a capital offense.

      (b) Who was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment for life.

      (c) Who was convicted of a sexual offense involving the use or threat of use of force or violence.

      (d) Who was convicted as a habitual criminal.

      (e) Who is a repeat offender.

      (f) Who was convicted of any other type of offense.

Ê The standards must be based upon objective criteria for determining the person’s probability of success on parole.

      2.  In establishing the standards, the Board shall consider the information on decisions regarding parole that is compiled and maintained pursuant to NRS 213.10887 and all other factors which are relevant in determining the probability that a convicted person will live and remain at liberty without violating the law if parole is granted or continued. The other factors the Board considers must include, but are not limited to:

      (a) The severity of the crime committed;

      (b) The criminal history of the person;

      (c) Any disciplinary action taken against the person while incarcerated;

      (d) Any previous parole violations or failures;

      (e) Any potential threat to society or to the convicted person; and

      (f) The length of his or her incarceration.

      3.  In determining whether to grant parole to a convicted person, the Board shall not consider whether the person has appealed the judgment of imprisonment for which the person is being considered for parole.

      4.  The standards adopted by the Board must provide for a greater punishment for a convicted person who has a history of repetitive criminal conduct or who commits a serious crime, with a violent crime considered the most serious, than for a convicted person who does not have a history of repetitive crimes and did not commit a serious crime.

      5.  The Board shall make available to the public a sample of the form the Board uses in determining the probability that a convicted person will live and remain at liberty without violating the law if parole is granted or continued.

      6.  At least once every 5 years, the Board shall review comprehensively the standards adopted by the Board. The review must include a determination of whether the standards are effective in predicting the probability that a convicted person will live and remain at liberty without violating the law if parole is granted or continued. If a standard is found to be ineffective, the Board shall not use that standard in its decisions regarding parole and shall adopt revised standards as soon as practicable after the review.

      7.  The Board shall report to each regular session of the Legislature:

      (a) The number and percentage of the Board’s decisions that conflicted with the standards;

      (b) The results and conclusions from the Board’s review pursuant to subsection 6; and

      (c) Any changes in the Board’s standards, policies, procedures, programs or forms that have been or will be made as a result of the review.

      (Added to NRS by 1989, 1884; A 1995, 2291; 1997, 3341; 2007, 3181; 2015, 2766; 2021, 2166)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2008–2017 · leading case: Stockmeier v. State, Board of Parole Commissioners
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stockmeier v. State, Board of Parole Commissioners (2011) nev “NRS 213.10885(1). Parole is an act of grace, however, and no one has a right to parole.”
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev · cites it 4× “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev · cites it 2× “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
Warden v. Meegan II (James) (2015) nev · cites it 2× “set forth in NRS 213.10885(2) and concluded that the factors largely weighed in Meegan's favor.”
Douglas v. State (2008) nev “1099(2) requires the Parole Board to consider: (1) whether there is a reasonable probability that the prisoner will live and remain at liberty without violating the laws; (2) whether the release is incompatible with the welfare of society; (3) the seriousness of the offense and…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.10885(1) — 3 cases
Stockmeier v. State, Board of Parole Commissioners (2011) nev “NRS 213.10885(1). Parole is an act of grace, however, and no one has a right to parole.”
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.10885(2) — 1 case
Warden v. Meegan II (James) (2015) nev “set forth in NRS 213.10885(2) and concluded that the factors largely weighed in Meegan's favor.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.10885(2)(a) — 2 cases
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE (2017) nev “1099(2) and NRS 213.10885(1), the Board must promulgate detailed standards to determine whether the release of an inmate on parole is appropriate.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.