Summary
The Supreme Court of Nevada considered whether a battery committed by a sister-in-law against her brother-in-law constitutes domestic violence under NRS 33.018. The court held that the statutory phrase "related by blood or marriage" includes in-law relationships and that the rule of lenity did not apply. The court granted the City of Las Vegas's petition for a writ of mandamus and directed the district court to affirm the domestic-violence conviction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Supreme Court of Nevada should exercise its discretionary mandamus jurisdiction to resolve the statutory question presented.
- Whether the phrase "any other person to whom he is related by blood or marriage" in NRS 33.018 includes a sister-in-law and brother-in-law relationship.
- Whether the rule of lenity required construing NRS 33.018 in favor of the criminal defendant.
Holdings
- The court may entertain and grant an original petition for a writ of mandamus when the petitioner lacks an adequate legal remedy and the petition presents a novel and important issue of law whose clarification promotes judicial economy.
- The phrase "related by blood or marriage" in NRS 33.018 plainly includes direct in-laws, including sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law; therefore, a battery by a sister-in-law against a brother-in-law constitutes domestic violence under the statute.
- The rule of lenity did not apply because NRS 33.018 is not ambiguous, and the statute should not be strained or distorted to exclude conduct clearly intended to fall within its scope.
Key quotations
“We now grant the City's petition for a writ of mandamus and conclude that a battery by a sister-in-law on a brother-in-law constitutes domestic violence under NRS 33.018.” (188 P.3d at 58)
“We conclude that, by its plain meaning, the term "related by blood or marriage" includes the relationship between a sister-in-law and a brother-in-law.” (188 P.3d at 59)
“Consequently, the district court improperly amended the judgment of conviction to reflect simple battery without a domestic violence enhancement.” (188 P.3d at 59)
Factual background
Pamela Meunier was convicted of battery against Jack Bocharski, her brother-in-law. The City prosecuted the battery as domestic violence under NRS 33.018, relying on the familial relationship and, more marginally, evidence that Meunier resided with Bocharski and her sister. The municipal court did not specify whether the domestic-violence classification rested on the relationship or residence, while the district court rejected the relationship basis as legally insufficient.
Procedural history
The Las Vegas Municipal Court convicted Pamela Meunier of misdemeanor battery constituting domestic violence. On appeal, the district court concluded that NRS 33.018 was ambiguous as to whether in-laws were included, amended the conviction to simple battery without the domestic-violence enhancement, and remanded for resentencing. The City petitioned the Supreme Court of Nevada for mandamus relief, and the court granted the petition and directed the district court to affirm the municipal court's judgment.
Remand instructions
The clerk was directed to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to affirm the municipal court's judgment of conviction for battery constituting domestic violence.