Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

EDWARD HERBERT PARKUS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, RESPONDENT.

OPINION

Per Curiam:

This appeal is without merit. Appellant claims that the wording of NRS 205.130(1), which states that one who passes checks with no account or insufficient funds "shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, unless such instrument, or a series of such instruments passed in the state during a period of 90 days, is in the amount of $100 or more, in which case such person shall be guilty of a felony. . . .", is unconstitutionally vague.

It is appellant's position that the statute fails to clearly indicate whether felony liability is imposed if one check is over $100 or when multiple checks totaled together exceed $100.

We find that men of ordinary intelligence would read this statute as imposing felony liability in either case. We therefore hold that NRS 205.130(1) is not vague and unconstitutional.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PARKUS v. STATE
(Oct 18, 1972)