The Court considered whether scoring errors in criminal defendants’ Probation Success Probability (PSP) forms constituted “impalpable or highly suspect evidence,” thereby adversely influencing the Division of Parole and Probation’s (the Division) sentencing recommendations. The Court affirmed one criminal defendant’s judgment of conviction (Docket No. 66118), but it vacated his sentence and remanded for a new sentencing hearing. It held that the district court abused its discretion and that defendant’s sentence was prejudiced because the district court relied on an erroneous PSP form in reaching its sentencing decision. It affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence of another criminal defendant (Docket 66944), concluding that the Division had a rational basis for making an upward adjustment to the defendant’s recommended sentence. Further, it concluded that the sentence was not prejudiced because the district court reached an independent sentencing decision, expressly disclaiming reliance on the Presentence Investigation Report’s (PSI) recommendation.
Armantrout, Heather, "Blankenship v. State, 132 Nev. Ad. Op 50 (Jul. 21, 2016)" (2016). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 986.