Las Vegas Sun

August 27, 2014

Currently: 80° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Troubled lawmaker 86’ed from Reno casino

Assemblyman Steven Brooks - Feb. 7, 2013

Assemblyman Steven Brooks hugs Assemblyman Pat Hickey before a meeting Thursday, Feb. 7, 2013 during the 2013 legislative session in Carson City. Launch slideshow »

Embattled Assemblyman Steven Brooks was kicked out of a Reno casino on Friday evening, following a disagreement with restaurant staff.

Sources said Brooks caused a disturbance at the Johnny Rockets restaurant inside the Grand Sierra Resort. But Brooks contends he was recognized because of the "bad press" he's been getting and told to leave.

"She kicked me out and accuse me of not having a license in a gaming facility," Brooks said in a text message in response to a reporter's question on Monday. "Well, I was eating."

Brooks added that the casino official "was noticeably upset with me. Must have been the bad press I have been getting?"

A public relations official at the Grand Sierra Resort said she had no details on the incident.

Brooks has been banned from the Legislative Building and is on paid administrative leave as a select committee prepares to hear evidence on whether he is fit to serve in the Legislature. In the past month, Brooks has been arrested twice in Las Vegas — once on allegations he threatened Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas, and a second time on domestic battery charges. He also was detained by police for a psychiatric evaluation and was hospitalized for five days.

Despite being banned from the building, Brooks has reportedly been living in a Carson City apartment and also stays with a family member in Reno, sources said.

Assembly leaders are moving forward with a select committee that will hold public hearings on Brooks' fitness for duty. The committee will then recommend to the full Assembly whether to expel him permanently from the Legislature.

Assembly Majority Leader William Horne, D-Las Vegas, said Monday the committee is "very close" to selecting a special counsel to present evidence on Brooks' behavior.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 9 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Self-destruct Mode.... Push the button! W0W!

  2. It keeps getting better for this Democrat, doesn't it?

  3. Why is this guy allowed to be on the streets? What does it take for citizens merely doing their daily & ordinary tasks to be protected from nutcases such as Brooks? Why is he not locked up in a loony-bin being zapped by electric shock treatments? Political correctness gone mad?

  4. I suppose this man has to shoot it out sooner or later to be locked up. He sees something else in the mirror..dang it. It is time to save him from himself. (He will not last...he just can't.)

  5. This guy just doesn't get it. He needs help.

    I commend the Johnny Rocket staff for the 86.

  6. @ jaquekeno..."?If he was asked for ID and could not produce it, the establishment has no choice but to ban him."

    Completely inaccurate. He clearly appears over 21, but even that didn't matter since the incident did not take place in a gaming area. While the casino was in its rights to refuse service to Brooks, they had options.

    Perhaps you should actually reads the Nevada Revised Statues pertaining to vagrants (NRS 207.030). That way you won't embarrass yourself with a statements like:

    "It is against the law not to be able to prove who you are with a valid ID. It's called the vagrancy law."

    @LVFActs101 "Why is this guy allowed to be on the streets?"

    Well, Jerry, the reason can be found in an obscure legal doctrine. I did some research for you and found the text online (http://bit.ly/XrPAXY). But I'll quote it for you here.

    "No person shall be...be deprived of ...liberty...without due process of law."

    It's part of something called the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    I would suggest that perhaps you need to be "locked up in a loony-bin being zapped by electric shock treatments" as anyone "merely doing their daily & ordinary tasks" who feel they need "to be protected from" someone trying to purchase a hamburger displays the type of unreasonable fear usually associated with paranoid schizophrenia.

    Please consult a mental health professional soon.

  7. Chunky says:

    This gentleman is on a one way track to serious trouble.

    He is entitled to due process but the warning signs are there that he's a ticking time bomb waiting to go off on himself and others around him.

    At this stage hopefully someone has looked into his gun ownership history and are taking appropriate steps else we'll be reading another sad tale soon and guns will get another bad rap.

    That's what Chunky thinks!

  8. This guy needs needs help. Obviously. I was kicked out of a resturant once because due to the poor service they were providing me I called Dominos to deliver a pizza to me just to see if I would get it before I got my food served by the resturant. Domino's won and I was asked to leave. Needless to say I did not leave a very big tip for the staff but I did enjoy a nice hot pizza.

  9. @jaquekeno...."bgh, if a peace officer asks you for ID on the STREET and you cannot produce one, you are considered a vagrant. Why would it be any different in a business establishment? Did you write the law or have you firsthand experience of its particulars?"

    No, I don't write the law, but I do READ IT. You should try it sometime. That way, you won't insist on making yourself look foolish.

    Both the Supreme Court (Terry v. Ohio) and the Nevada Legislature (NRS 171.123) state police can only stop someone if they has reasonable and articulable suspicion the "person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime."

    While the NRS does say "Any person so detained shall identify himself or herself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer," The Nevada Supreme Court interpreted "Identify Yourself" as meaning stating your name only. (Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada).

    In the Hiiblel case, the court "identified a constitutional difficulty with many modern vagrancy laws" due to the fact they, "denied proper notice to potential offenders and permitted police officers to exercise unfettered discretion in the enforcement of the law."

    The Hiible opinion further states, "the Nevada statute required only that the suspect divulge his name; presumably, he could do so without handing over any documents whatsoever. As long as the suspect tells the officer his name, he has satisfied the dictates of the Nevada stop-and-identify law."

    If only you had access to the internet you could have easily looked up these facts yourself and avoided looking foolish twice in one day. You should really look into getting internet access.