As noted by 8 News Now, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford sponsored a clemency application for Norman Smith, a man serving a 10-to-39-year prison sentence in the killing of Tineshea Adams, but Ford did not attend the Pardons Board meeting where the case was heard on Sept. 16. Smith was convicted of voluntary manslaughter with use of a deadly weapon in March 2019 for killing Adams in North Las Vegas on Dec. 13, 2015. Adams was pregnant at the time, and her fetus had a gestational age of around 16 to 17 weeks, according to the medical examiner, who determined the fetus would have survived had Adams not been killed.
The details of Ford’s sponsorship and his absence from the hearing were first reported by KLAS 8 News Now. A spokesperson for the Attorney General’s Office told the station that the prosecutor in Smith’s case had written a letter of support for the clemency request. But a letter from Chief Deputy District Attorney Michael Schwartzer, obtained by the outlet, reportedly does not appear to express support for Smith’s clemency bid — a direct conflict between the AG’s account and the prosecutor’s own written position.
The Attorney General’s Office later clarified, per an editor’s note referenced in the report, that the spokesperson had been referring to a year-old letter written for a parole board proceeding, separate from the letter submitted to the Pardons Board. The station’s report does not resolve which letter ultimately applied to the Sept. 16 hearing, only that the two documents do not match the office’s public description.
Who Asked for the Hearing, and Why Ford Wasn’t There
Smith’s mother, described in the report as a schoolteacher with cancer, asked Ford to place her son’s case on the board’s agenda so the board could consider modifying his sentence. Ford agreed to sponsor the application but, per the account, did not guarantee he would actually vote for clemency or a sentence modification — sponsorship simply moves a case forward for consideration.
The Attorney General’s Office spokesperson said Ford missed the Sept. 16 meeting because of a family emergency. The spokesperson also told the outlet that sponsoring an application only requests an investigation into the case and does not mean the sponsoring board member supports clemency. The Nevada Board of Pardons Commissioners, per Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 213, consists of the governor, the justices of the state Supreme Court, and the attorney general.
The Underlying Case Against Smith
According to witness testimony cited in the report, Smith said “I’m about to blow,” meaning he was about to shoot, shortly before Adams was killed. A witness also said, per Schwartzer’s letter, that a woman had warned Smith that Adams was pregnant. Smith admitted to police that he shot Adams, and he claimed self-defense at trial, where he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter with use of a deadly weapon rather than a more serious homicide charge.
At the time of the killing, Smith was on house arrest connected to a separate armed-robbery series, per a report from 8 News Now. In 2017 he was convicted of three counts of armed robbery with use of a deadly weapon and received a 10-to-39-year sentence for those crimes. The report also notes Smith’s reported membership in the YNIC street gang, which the outlet describes as having originated from the Delmonico Crips.
Prosecutors’ Position on the Robbery Sentence
The Clark County District Attorney’s Office did not oppose probation for the armed-robbery charges, according to the report, and explained that Smith would serve time for the killing regardless of how the robbery sentence was resolved. The office’s account, as relayed to the station, conflicted with the explanation Ford’s office gave for sponsoring Smith’s clemency application in the first place.
The station’s reporting does not include the Pardons Board’s decision or any final disposition from the Sept. 16 meeting. What remains clear from the record is a dispute between two arms of Nevada’s legal system — the attorney general’s office and the prosecutor who handled Smith’s case — over what support, if any, exists for reducing his sentence.
