Recommendation against probation stands

Eric Blake Tiensvold was in District Court April 10 for final sentencing on charges of open and gross lewdness, a category D felony. His defense attorney, Steve Evenson, advocated long and hard for probation.

The Department of Parole and Probation uses a computer program in which scores are entered in many different categories to determine what the probation recommendation will be, as part of the pre-sentence investigation. Evenson spent an hour and a half arguing over each of the scores given his client by Debbie Okuma, Pre-sentence Investigation Specialist for the Department of Parole and Probation. Using the results of the scoring program, P&P had recommended against Tiensvold receiving probation.

Evenson attempted to discredit the scores, or at least to cast enough doubt as to their fairness, to show that with changes to a number of those scores, his client could have been closer to the borderline between a recommendation for or against probation.

Finally, Evenson asked District Judge Michael Montero to require the Department of Parole and Probation to re-do the scoring, using a different probation officer. Montero denied the request, adding that, in any case, the recommendation from P&P is just that – a recommendation and he is not bound by it.

Evenson then called two of Tiensvold’s family members, who testified to his good character and said that they supported him and needed him. They said he worked as much as he could whenever he could, although he did not have a job at this time.

Tiensvold’s arrest date was Nov. 6, 2016. Judge Montero pointed out that the case has taken a long time to work its way through the system. It was also noted in court that the charges of open and gross lewdness against Tiensvold were for events that occurred some years ago.

Tiensvold’s defense attorney said the psychosexual evaluation done by an expert found that Tiensvold was at a low risk to reoffend. He added that the counseling that was recommended in the evaluation was available in Winnemucca and said Tiensvold’s family would make sure he was enrolled in counseling.

When allowed to speak for himself, Tiensvold apologized to the victim and said he knows what he did was wrong. “I know I’m going to have this on my back for the rest of my life, so the only thing that I can do is to do the best I can to support my family.” He then apologized for bringing his family into such a situation.

Montero sentenced Tiensvold to 15-28 months in prison. He levied a $25 administrative assessment, $153 for DNA collection and analysis, and $850 for the cost of the psychosexual evaluation. When Tiensvold is released after serving his prison sentence, he will begin lifetime registration and supervision as a sex offender.