Hankins v. State, 7800
| Decision Date | 23 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 7800,7800 |
| Citation | 538 P.2d 167,91 Nev. 477 |
| Parties | Thurman HANKINS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Thurman Hankins was convicted by a jury, of rape, infamous crime against nature and burglary. His sole contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict on the rape charge.
Although Hankins testified that the victim consented to the sexual act, the jury chose to believe the prosecution witnesses, and not Hankins version of the incident.
When there is conflicting testimony presented, it is for the jury to determine what weight and credibility to give to the testimony. 'Where there is substantial evidence to support a verdict in a criminal case, as the record indicates in this case, the reviewing court will not disturb the verdict nor set aside the judgment.' Sanders v. State, 90 Nev. 433, 529 P.2d 206 (1974). See also, Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Crowe v. State, 84 Nev. 358, 441 P.2d 90 (1969).
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Diomampo v. State
...2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979))). 55. Cunningham v. State, 94 Nev. 128, 130, 575 P.2d 936, 937 (1978) (quoting Hankins v. State, 91 Nev. 477, 477-78, 538 P.2d 167, 168 (1975)). ...
-
Porter v. State
...identified the appellant as the perpetrator. Such conflicting testimony addresses the sound discretion of the jury. Hankins v. State, 91 Nev. 477, 538 P.2d 167 (1975); Allen v. State, 91 Nev. 78, 530 P.2d 1195 (1975); King v. State, 87 Nev. 537, 490 P.2d 1054 (1971). Appellant acknowledges ......
-
McNair v. State
...the weight and credibility of such testimony. See Bolden v. State, 97 Nev. 71, 73, 624 P.2d 20, 20 (1981); Hankins v. State, 91 Nev. 477, 477, 538 P.2d 167, 168 (1975).10 McNair also contends that his actions are simply of ethical concern suitable for resolution by the medical society. Thos......
-
Escobar v. Williams
...and the probative value of their testimony. See Stewart v. State, 94 Nev. 378, 379, 580 P.2d 473, 473 (1978) (citing Hankins v. State, 91 Nev. 477, 530 P.2d 167, 168 (1975)). Accordingly, we conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support Escobar's conviction.ECF No. 16-15, p. 2-3. Th......