Cases | Seres v. Lerner, 102 P.3d 91 (Nev. 2004) | 2018
After being convicted of manslaughter, the defendant/respondent was sentenced to prison time. The defendant, while in prison, wrote a book that was dedicated only in part to describing the events surrounding the killing of the victim. The victim’s sister then sued the defendant/respondent under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 217.007, Nevada’s “Son of Sam” law, seeking recovery of the defendant/respondent’s book proceeds. The trial court granted the defendant/respondent’s motion to dismiss, citing prevailing Supreme Court jurisprudence. The Nevada Supreme Court found that: 1) even though the state does not directly confiscate the funds, “judicial enforcement of state legislation involves state action restricting speech implicating the First Amendment;” 2) because the statute allows the filing of claims even after the expiration of the statutes of limitation for tort claims, it regulates content; and 3) these findings indicate that strict scrutiny must be applied, requiring the court to determine if the statute was narrowly tailored to meet compelling interests. The supreme court held that even though compensating victims and prevention of criminal profiteering are compelling state interests, the statute is overinclusive because it regulates more speech than necessary by “allow[ing] recovery of proceeds from works that include expression both related and unrelated to the crime, imposing a disincentive to engage in public discourse and nonexploitative discussion of it.” The district court’s order dismissing the action was affirmed.