
NRS 205.320 deals, with threats made for a prohibited purpose. These threats can be direct or indirect. The law applies when someone threatens to:
The State must also prove what the person intended to achieve by making the threat. The statute covers threats intended to obtain money or property, influence a public officer’s actions, or commit, assist, or bring about an illegal or wrongful act. It also covers threats meant to make someone create, sign, execute, alter, or destroy a valuable security, instrument, or writing that affects or is intended to affect property, a legal claim, or a defense.
Threats that fail to accomplish the desired result are still covered by the statute. For example, demanding payment under threat of revealing a secret is still covered by NRS 205.320, even if the victim refuses to pay. In Clem v. State, the Nevada Supreme Court recognized two separate crimes in this case.
The first was extortion, because the defendant forced the victim to call her friends to get her money. The second crime was robbery, because the defendant took the victim’s money and food stamps from her pocket.
NRS 205.322 shall apply when the act of causing a debtor to reasonably fear that late payment of a debt could result in violence or other criminal acts to cause bodily harm to the debtor or to another, or to cause damage to property of the debtor or in the debtor’s possession.
Nick Wooldridge has a long track record of representing clients accused of serious federal and state crimes in Nevada.
For example, a message warning that a debtor’s truck will be vandalized if payment is late can fall within this section if it gives the debtor a reasonable basis to fear the damage.
Both statutes require the court to order restitution. In Gee v. State, the Nevada Supreme Court explained that the amount of a restitution award must be supported by reliable, accurate evidence.
NRS 176A.100 separately governs the court’s authority to suspend a sentence and grant probation.
For the federal provisions, see the firm’s federal extortion overview.
When I initially met with Mr. Wooldridge, he took the opportunity to sit and go over my problem with me. He described details in my case which he found disturbing and explained why he I should have him on my side.