Appellant was a convicted sex offender on lifetime supervision. When Appellant had been on lifetime supervision for five years, the State Board of Parole Commissioners imposed additional conditions that were not enumerated


McNeill v. State – 132 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 54

4 thoughts on “McNeill v State

  1. Does anyone know if there is a class action suit yet as a result of this ruling? If so, who do I talk to to join?

    1. From what I’ve heard, “those that know best” are trying to figure out what this means and what to do from here.
      Haven’t heard anything about a class action yet, but this decision just won a new trial for the individual because there were more P&P violations charged that were nowhere in the scope of what a violation is, in addition to the ‘legitimate’ violations he was charged with. He’ll probably still end up getting found guilty, but at least the decision prevents parole from adding anything else.

  2. They are attempting to fix their law yet again:

    And as they did 2 years ago, they are once again attempting to apply the amendatory provisions retroactively, which would violate Ex Post Facto laws.

    There is also a hearing scheduled on January 17th, 2019 for the Draskovich/Lichtenstein lawsuit over Lifetime Supervision:
    Maybe something good will become of that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to Top