Court Document: Opposition To Motion To Reduce Bail

1 CODE 2645
Jason D. Woodbury
2
#6870
3 885 East Musser Street
Suite #2030C
4 Carson City, Nevada 89701
(775) 887-2072
5
6
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
7
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE
8
* * *
9
THE STATE OF NEVADA,
10
Plaintiff, Case No.: CR22-2306
11
v. Dept. No.: D1
12
NICHOLAS JAY BARASH VIETTI,
13
Defendant.
14 ____________________________________/
15
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO REDUCE BAIL
16
COMES NOW, THE STATE OF NEVADA, by and through its counsel, JASON
17
D. WOODBURY, Special Prosecutor of the County of Washoe, State of
18
Nevada, and opposes the Motion for Reasonable Bail (“Motion”) filed
19
with this Court on April 6, 2023. This Opposition is made pursuant to
20
N.R.Cr.P. 8(4) and is based upon the points and authorities set forth
21
\\\\
22
\\\\
23
\\\\
24
\\\\
25
\\\\
26
1
1 below, all pleadings and papers heretofore filed in this case, and the
2 arguments presented at any hearing on this Motion.
3 DATED this 11th day of April, 2023.
4 WASHOE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
5
/s/ Jason D. Woodbury
6 JASON D. WOODBURY
Special Prosecutor
7 DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
Nevada State Bar No.6870
8 Carson City District Attorney
885 East Musser Street, Ste. 2030
9 Carson City, NV 89701
Telephone: 775-887-2072
10 jwoodbury@carson.org
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2 I. INTRODUCTION
3 The monetary bail condition that has been imposed in this case is
4 reasonable and narrowly tailored to protect the safety of the public
5 and the victims in this case and to ensure the Defendant’s presence at
6 future proceedings. For this reason, the Motion should be denied.
7 II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
8 The Defendant has an extensive history of extreme and violent
9 animosity toward the Washoe County Sheriff and District Attorney.
10 Beginning in 2015, he has engaged in a virtually continuous pattern of
11 disseminating a multitude of profane, defamatory, and highly aggressive
12 communications directed at law enforcement officers, judges, and
13 attorneys involved with the criminal justice process.
14 On or about June 1, 2022, the Defendant’s anger culminated in a
15 30-plus-minute tirade that included the following direct threats:
16 • “Christopher Hicks, when I fucking meet you in public, dude,
17 you fucking pussy ass mother-fucker dude, I’m going to choke
18 you the fuck out. And my homeboys are going to arrest your
19 old lady, dude. And going to arrest all your fucking family
20 members. Because this shit’s going to stop in this city.
21 Plain and simple.”
22 • “You’re a socialist, jealous, piece of shit, faggot…. You
23 and Balaam need the fucking gallows. And by the end of this
24 war, we’re going to have you hanging upside down in a fucking
25 tree after you’re already dead, motherfucker. I’m going to
26 let all the locals poke you with a fucking stick. And I’m
3
1 going to let all the locals take a piss on you. And then
2 guess what we’re going to do with your wife? We’re going to—
3 We’re going to sell her into slavery, and we’re going to let
4 the fucking cartels bang her out on fucking video for fucking
5 money, dude.”
6 • “I’ve got a couple thousand rounds, and I’m going to tell you
7 right now, there’s nobody at the Sheriff’s Department right
8 now that I’m afraid of. I am your number one combat veteran
9 in this fucking town, and you fucked with me in the wrong
10 way. There’s no more warnings. I don’t have handcuffs,
11 Balaam. I don’t have handcuffs, Mr. Hicks. When you see me,
12 you’re dead.”
13 • “I’ve already got a list of a hundred dads that want to
14 fucking knock your teeth out, Chris. And when we hang you
15 up, when we string you up, Mr. Hicks, I’m going to give them
16 all a chance to fucking do it. And guess what? I’m going to
17 let them do it for free.”
18 • “But I promise you, by the end, both of you, I’m going to
19 have hands on you.”
20 • “Balaam, there is no fucking making peace with me with you.
21 You need to fucking resign or get the fuck out of the city
22 and the county, because I’m going to tell you what’s going to
23 happen. I have your home address…. I have your personal
24 cell phone number. I have your wife’s cell phone number and
25 I’ve put trackers on everything. You guys want to play that
26
4
1 shit with me. I caught three trackers on my phone the other
2 day.”
3 • “I’m telling you, my Marines are already in town and your,
4 every day you’re getting a step closer to getting your ass
5 kicked, dude. And not even just your ass kicked, we’re going
6 to take your fucking police department. We’re going to take
7 the whole Sheriff’s Department and we’re going to lock it up,
8 and we’re going to fucking slit your throat for nothing. You
9 put your hands on me, it’s assault. I fucking kill you. You
10 show up with fucking firearms and get out of your car with
11 your hand on your firearm, I’m shooting at you.
12 • “You come and confront me at all, I’m shooting your cops,
13 dude.”
14 • “When I see you in public, I’m going to fuck you up. You can
15 have all the cops you want in the world. You can have
16 whatever, I’m going to fuck you up, Balaam. Not even a little
17 bit. I’m going to embarrass you, because I’m going to do it
18 on video. And then when they hear you crying and fucking
19 getting slapped up and whatever, they’re never going to
20 respect you ever again in this city…. Because I’ve already
21 posted your address, dude. I’m surprised your house hasn’t
22 been firebombed already, honestly. Because I posted your
23 fucking address and Christopher Hicks’s address fucking last
24 week.”
25 • “Mr. Hicks, you about to be a dead mother-fucker, straight
26 up. Like the guys that are coming after you, they’ve already
5
1 been paid and a lot of them, you’re never, your, your family
2 is going to spend the next hundred years trying to figure out
3 what happened. Go ahead, touch me, go ahead, pull that gun
4 out. I’m not going to kill you. My men are going to fucking
5 kill you. That’s if I don’t pull the trigger first. Who are
6 they going to believe? The dead District Attorney or the 30
7 Marines?”
8 • I’m going to get you to fucking pull a gun and I’m going to
9 fucking have my guys shoot you, and I’m going to shoot you.
10 I’m going to do the same thing you guys do to cops, dude.
11 You guys fucked up with me.”
12 On June 4, 2022, the Defendant was arrested on suspicion of two
13 counts of Intimidating a Public Officer with Immediate Threat of
14 Physical Force, category C felonies as defined by NRS 199.300(3)(a)(1).
15 At the time of his arrest, the Defendant told officers they were “lucky”
16 he was not armed with firearms, as he “always” has a weapon when he
17 leaves his residence.
18 At the time of his arrest, there was an active warrant for the
19 arrest of the Defendant which had been issued September 2, 2020 out of
20 Mineral County, Nevada. See Warrant of Arrest (Sept. 2, 2020) (attached
21 hereto and marked as Exhibit 2) [hereinafter “Exhibit 2”]. The arrest
22 warrant commanded the Defendant’s arrest on misdemeanor charges of
23 making a false statement to or obstruction of a public officer, in
24 violation of NRS 197.190, disturbing the peace, in violation of NRS
25 203.119, resisting a public officer, in violation of NRS 199.280(3),
26 and criminal contempt, in violation of NRS 199.340. Exhibit 2. The

6
1 record of Mr. Vietti’s criminal history indicates his initial arrest on
2 the first three offenses occurred on December 27, 2019.
3 On June 7, 2022, a Criminal Complaint was filed charging the
4 Defendant with the offenses for which he had been arrested. As required
5 by Nevada law, the Sparks Justice Court conducted an individualized
6 hearing and review of the Defendant’s custody status. NRS 178.4851;
7 Valdez-Jimenez v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., 136 Nev. Adv.
8 Rep. 20, 460 P.3d 976, 985 (Nev. 2020). At the June 8 hearing, counsel
9 for the Defendant requested that the Defendant be released. The Justice
10 Court rejected the request and set the bail in this case at $100,000
11 cash, with conditions requiring enhanced pretrial supervision, no
12 contact with the victims, no possession of firearms, and GPS monitoring.
13 The ruling was based on specific findings of fact and corresponding
14 analysis as required by NRS 178.4851(3).
15 As the case was pending in Justice Court, the Defendant filed a
16 motion to have his monetary bail reduced. A hearing on the motion was
17 held October 5, 2022. The motion was denied.
18 The pending Motion is the Defendant’s third attempt to convince a
19 court that his bail should be reduced.
20 III. ARGUMENT
21 A. The Defendant poses a significant danger to the victims and
22 the public.
23 The first and most important factor for the Court to consider in
24 determining monetary bail is the “nature and circumstances of the
25 offense charged.” NRS 178.498. Relatedly, the safety of the community,
26 including specifically that of “the victim and the victim’s family,”

7
1 must be considered in bail determinations. Nev. Const. art. I,
2 §8A(1)(c); Valdez-Jimenez, 460 P.3d at 984. The threats which are the
3 substance of the pending charges in this case are nothing short of
4 alarming. The Defendant says he is going to “arrest” the victims and
5 their family members. He says he is going to physically assault the
6 victims. On multiple occasions, he threatens to kill the victims. He
7 makes repeated references to assisting in the perpetration of sex crimes
8 upon spouses of the victims. He asserts that his attacks will occur
9 without warning. The threats from the Defendant are not veiled,
10 implied, or off-hand, unguarded remarks. They are direct, immediate,
11 and repetitious.
12 The distressing nature of the Defendant’s threats is revealed
13 perhaps most strongly by the behavioral and lifestyle changes made by
14 the subjects of the threats. The victims in this case are high-profile
15 public officials, accustomed to sometimes hostile scrutiny of their job
16 performance. However, each of the victims implemented changes in their
17 routine and everyday behaviors for precautionary purposes as a result
18 of the Defendant’s threats. See Transcript of Proceedings, Preliminary
19 Hr’g at 51:17 – 52:16, 60:18 – 62:4, 77:12 – 79:1 (Oct. 21, 2022)
20 (precautionary measures taken by the victims included: warning family
21 members to be on alert; making sure they could recognize Defendant and
22 vehicles associated with Defendant; taking extra precautions that gates
23 and doors were locked; advising family to modify regular routes of
24 travel; increasing law enforcement patrols around residence; and
25 carrying firearm outside residence).
26
8
1 The Motion seeks to attribute the Defendant’s offenses to post-
2 traumatic stress disorder.1 And, to be sure, segments of the Defendant’s
3 June 1 podcast are clearly delusional. But this makes the Defendant
4 more dangerous, not less. Insofar as the Defendant subjectively
5 believes, as he states, that the Sheriff and District Attorney are
6 involved in illicit drug activity, fraud, corruption, falsifying legal
7 documents, and intentionally violating statutory and constitutional
8 mandates, he is substantially more likely to view his threats as
9 justified and to act in furtherance of those threats than is someone
10 with a stable mental condition.
11 This Court should also consider the escalating nature of the
12 Defendant’s conduct in assessing the risk he poses. What began as
13 aggressive and marginally threatening written correspondence and posts
14 on social media has progressed to a point where the Defendant has
15 articulated detailed plans to perpetrate physical harm, including
16 death, on the victims, their families, and their staff.
17 The Defendant’s conduct presents a substantial threat to the safety
18 of the victims as well as the public in general. These factors alone
19 justify the imposition of monetary bail in a substantial amount. The
20 previous decisions to impose and maintain a monetary bail requirement
21 should not be disturbed.
22 \\\\
23 \\\\
24 \\\\
25
26 1 This Court may consider the Defendant’s mental condition in determining whether
monetary bail is necessary and, if so, in 9what amount. NRS 178.4853(4).
1 B. The Defendant is a flight risk.
2 When considering bail, in addition to the safety of the community
3 and the victims, Nevada law also requires courts to evaluate the
4 likelihood of whether the Defendant will appear for proceedings as
5 ordered. NRS 178.4853(5) (courts are to consider “any record of
6 appearing or failing to appear after release on bail or without bail”);
7 Valdez-Jimenez, 460 P.3d at 984 (monetary bail appropriate when
8 “necessary to ensure the defendant’s appearance”). In this regard, there
9 is additional cause for concern. The Defendant was arrested in
10 December, 2019 for Providing a False Statement to Police Officer, in
11 violation of NRS 197.190, Resisting a Public Officer, in violation of
12 NRS 199.280, and Breach of Peace, in violation of NRS 203.010. The
13 arrest occurred in Mineral County, Nevada. Those offenses have not
14 been adjudicated to date, and a warrant for the Defendant’s arrest was
15 issued on September 2, 2020.
16 The nature of the offenses alleged in Mineral County is
17 additionally meaningful in regard to the Defendant’s custody status in
18 that two of the offenses implicate conduct that is actively resistive
19 of lawful directives.
20 More significantly, the Defendant’s disruption of the orderly
21 adjudication of these offenses for a period of over two years reveals
22 a critical risk factor. Simply put, if the Defendant has allowed a
23 criminal arrest and active arrest warrant to remain unresolved for such
24 an extensive period of time in that case, there is no reasonable basis
25 to assume that he will conduct himself differently in this case. Only
26
10
1 a monetary bail in a significant sum provides a sufficient incentive to
2 reasonably assure a different result in this matter.
3 C. The housing plan and treatment services referenced in the
4 Motion are entirely inadequate to mitigate the risks at issue.
5 The Motion indicates that upon his release from custody, the
6 Defendant will be admitted to a residential treatment program
7 administered by the Veterans Administration. Undersigned counsel had
8 an opportunity to discuss with Sue Cooper, the individual referenced by
9 the Motion, concerning the particulars of the services available to the
10 Defendant.
11 The program to which the Defendant would be admitted is entirely
12 voluntary. As Ms. Cooper described, the Defendant would consult with
13 a designated treatment provider to develop a specific plan for his
14 treatment. That could include group and individual sessions, but there
15 is no predetermined structure for the treatment. More concerning, the
16 treatment options would only be implemented at the sole discretion of
17 the Defendant.
18 The residential situation is even more problematic. The Defendant
19 would be placed in communal living quarters. The facility is not locked
20 and residents are free to come and go in their unilateral discretion.
21 Veterans Affairs staff would be present at the facility on weekdays,
22 but nighttime supervision consists of a staff member spending the night.
23 There would be no active supervision during nighttime hours. On
24 weekends, there is no supervision at all due to staffing shortages.
25 These conditions are clearly inadequate in regard to the
26 Defendant’s highly volatile condition. Not only does it allow a

11
1 situation in which the Defendant would have the virtually unrestricted
2 ability to leave the facility, it presents significant risks for other
3 residents of the communal facility.
4 D. The NPRA was scored correctly.
5 The Motion also challenges the NPRA scoring. However, upon
6 analysis, it is clear that it was scored correctly. In fact, it should
7 have included 2 additional points to account for the pending charges
8 from Mineral County.
9 The Motion disputes the Defendant’s NPRA score on three items.
10 First, the Motion asserts the Defendant should have been deemed employed
11 by virtue of his alleged status as a “registered student at Truckee
12 Meadows Community College.” However, there is no dispute that the
13 Defendant was not employed at the time of his arrest. There is also no
14 claim that he was not actively taking classes at TMCC or anywhere else.
15 Therefore, the item was appropriately scored on the NPRA.
16 Similarly, the Motion contends the Defendant should be rescored as
17 having a “verified” cell phone because his was seized at the time of
18 his arrest. Presumably, the challenge to this score is based the
19 Defendant’s intention to procure a new cell phone upon release. But
20 this merely reflects a prospective and self-serving representation from
21 the Defendant. The NPRA does not, and obviously should not, reflect
22 scores based on self-serving future intentions. As such, the NPRA score
23 on this item correctly indicated the Defendant does not have a verified
24 cell phone at present.
25 Finally, the Motion asserts the Defendant should have been scored
26 as a long-term Nevada resident. However, the Defendant was actually

12
1 residing in a “motorhome/bus” parked on Shepherd Drive in Sun Valley at
2 the time of his arrest. As such, the NPRA properly characterized the
3 Defendant’s living situation as “homeless” and the score was correct.
4 IV. CONCLUSION
5 For these reasons, the STATE OF NEVADA respectfully requests that
6 this Court deny the Motion.
7 DATED this 11th day of April, 2023.
8 WASHOE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
9
10 JASON D. WOODBURY
Special Prosecutor
Nevada State Bar No.6870__
12 Carson City DA’s Office
Telephone: 775-887-2070
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
13
AFFIRMATION PURSUANT TO NRS 239B.030
1
2 The undersigned does hereby affirm that the preceding

3 document does not contain the social security number of any person.
4
WASHOE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
5
6
7 JASON D. WOODBURY
Special Prosecutor
Nevada State Bar No.6870__
9 Carson City DA’s Office
Telephone: 775-887-2070
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
14
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Carson City District
3 Attorney’s Office in Carson City, Nevada and that on this date, I
4 electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using
5 the ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filing to the
6 following:
7 BRIDGET MATOS
SCOTT FAHRENDORF
8 Deputy Public Defender
Washoe County Public Defender’s Office
9
10
11 JASON D. WOODBURY
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
15

Court Document: Opposition To Motion To Reduce Bail

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Court Document: Opposition To Motion To Reduce Bail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 CODE 2645

2 arguments presented at any hearing on this Motion.

3 DATED this 11th day of April, 2023.

4 WASHOE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

4 reasonable and narrowly tailored to protect the safety of the public

6 future proceedings. For this reason, the Motion should be denied.

7 II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

8 The Defendant has an extensive history of extreme and violent

9 animosity toward the Washoe County Sheriff and District Attorney.

10 Beginning in 2015, he has engaged in a virtually continuous pattern of

11 disseminating a multitude of profane, defamatory, and highly aggressive

12 communications directed at law enforcement officers, judges, and

13 attorneys involved with the criminal justice process.

14 On or about June 1, 2022, the Defendant’s anger culminated in a

15 30-plus-minute tirade that included the following direct threats:

16 • “Christopher Hicks, when I fucking meet you in public, dude,

17 you fucking pussy ass mother-fucker dude, I’m going to choke

20 members. Because this shit’s going to stop in this city.

21 Plain and simple.”

22 • “You’re a socialist, jealous, piece of shit, faggot…. You

24 war, we’re going to have you hanging upside down in a fucking

25 tree after you’re already dead, motherfucker. I’m going to

7 right now, there’s nobody at the Sheriff’s Department right

9 in this fucking town, and you fucked with me in the wrong

10 way. There’s no more warnings. I don’t have handcuffs,

13 • “I’ve already got a list of a hundred dads that want to

16 all a chance to fucking do it. And guess what? I’m going to

17 let them do it for free.”

18 • “But I promise you, by the end, both of you, I’m going to

19 have hands on you.”

20 • “Balaam, there is no fucking making peace with me with you.

23 happen. I have your home address…. I have your personal

25 I’ve put trackers on everything. You guys want to play that

3 • “I’m telling you, my Marines are already in town and your,

4 every day you’re getting a step closer to getting your ass

6 to take your fucking police department. We’re going to take

7 the whole Sheriff’s Department and we’re going to lock it up,

11 your hand on your firearm, I’m shooting at you.

12 • “You come and confront me at all, I’m shooting your cops,

17 bit. I’m going to embarrass you, because I’m going to do it

19 getting slapped up and whatever, they’re never going to

20 respect you ever again in this city…. Because I’ve already

21 posted your address, dude. I’m surprised your house hasn’t

22 been firebombed already, honestly. Because I posted your

23 fucking address and Christopher Hicks’s address fucking last

25 • “Mr. Hicks, you about to be a dead mother-fucker, straight

2 is going to spend the next hundred years trying to figure out

3 what happened. Go ahead, touch me, go ahead, pull that gun

6 they going to believe? The dead District Attorney or the 30

10 I’m going to do the same thing you guys do to cops, dude.

11 You guys fucked up with me.”

12 On June 4, 2022, the Defendant was arrested on suspicion of two

13 counts of Intimidating a Public Officer with Immediate Threat of

14 Physical Force, category C felonies as defined by NRS 199.300(3)(a)(1).

16 he was not armed with firearms, as he “always” has a weapon when he

17 leaves his residence.

20 Mineral County, Nevada. See Warrant of Arrest (Sept. 2, 2020) (attached

21 hereto and marked as Exhibit 2) [hereinafter “Exhibit 2”]. The arrest

22 warrant commanded the Defendant’s arrest on misdemeanor charges of

23 making a false statement to or obstruction of a public officer, in

24 violation of NRS 197.190, disturbing the peace, in violation of NRS

25 203.119, resisting a public officer, in violation of NRS 199.280(3),

26 and criminal contempt, in violation of NRS 199.340. Exhibit 2. The