Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.110

Regulations regarding parole; suspension of parole to permit induction into military service

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 213.110  Regulations regarding parole; suspension of parole to permit induction into military service.

      1.  Subject to the provisions of NRS 213.120, the Board shall establish rules and regulations under which any prisoner who is now or hereafter may be imprisoned in the state prison, or in another jurisdiction as provided in NRS 176.045, may be allowed to go upon parole outside of the buildings or enclosures, but to remain, while on parole, in the legal custody and under the control of the Board and subject at any time to be taken within the enclosure of the state prison.

      2.  The Board, for good cause and in order to permit induction into the military service of the United States, may suspend paroles during the period of the parolee’s active service after induction into the military service.

      [11:149:1933; A 1943, 55; 1943 NCL § 11579]—(NRS A 1957, 739; 1965, 434; 1967, 526; 1969, 598; 1971, 601; 1973, 181; 1995, 2292)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1964–1978 · leading case: Raggio v. Campbell
Raggio v. Campbell (1964) nev · cites it 6× “” Respondents support the order releasing the prisoners on parole by reason of the provisions of subsection 1 of NRS 213.110, reading as follows: “1. The board shall have power to establish rules and regulations under which any prisoner who is now or hereafter may be imprisoned…”
Creps v. State (1978) nev · cites it 2× “095) and NRS 213.110 (similarly codified after its amendment) both allowed the board of parole commissioners to grant parole to a person in the county jail, parole may now be granted only to persons confined in the Nevada state prison.”
State v. Eighth Judicial District Court (1969) nev · cites it 2× “1099; NRS 213.110 and NRS 213.120; State v. Braunstein, 136 A.”
Anushevitz v. Warden, Nevada State Prison (1970) nev · cites it 3× “489, February 8, 1968) construing NRS 213.110, they were ineligible for parole.”
Mathis v. Warden (1970) nev · cites it 2× “It can be assumed that the appellant was fully advised of the consequences of his plea. State v. Cummings, 328 P.”
Goldsworthy v. Hannifin (1970) nev “We held in that case the legislature was merely exercising its constitutional powers to determine the terms and conditions of parole when it enacted NRS 213.110 which precluded parole being granted to a prisoner who had been previously convicted of more than three felonies.”
Stocks v. Warden, Nevada State Prison (1970) nev “NRS 213.110(1); Eisentrager v. State Board of Parole, 85 Nev.”
State v. Clark (1974) nev “1099; NRS 213.110; NRS 213.120. If, of course, an inequity can be shown, it is possible that Clark can seek immediate relief before the State Board of Pardons Commissioners.”
Sali v. Warden, Nevada State Prison (1971) nev “Because of previous convictions, he is denied eligibility for parole under NRS 213.110. He now asserts that he must be allowed to plead anew because he was not advised of his ineligibility for parole, *42 which he says is a “consequence of his plea” under NRS 174.”
Eisentrager v. State Board of Parole Commissioners (1969) nev · cites it 4× “He has recently been advised by the authorities that he is ineligible for parole because NRS 213.110 1 denies parole to anyone who has been previously convicted of more than three felonies.”
State v. EIGHTH JUD. DIST. CT. IN & FOR COUNTY., OF CLARK (1969) nev · cites it 2× “1099; NRS 213.110 and NRS 213.120; State v. Braunstein, 136 A.”
Collins v. Warden (1972) nev · cites it 3× “Appellant further seeks the right to re-plead, or to be resentenced, because the court assertedly was unaware NRS 213.110 precludes parole to persons who have “previously been more than three times convicted of a felony and served a term in a penal institution.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 213.110(1) — 2 cases
Stocks v. Warden, Nevada State Prison (1970) nev “NRS 213.110(1); Eisentrager v. State Board of Parole, 85 Nev.”
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.