Hudson v. State, 8272

CourtSupreme Court of Nevada
Citation545 P.2d 1163,92 Nev. 84
Docket NumberNo. 8272,8272
PartiesDean Jackson HUDSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
Decision Date12 February 1976

Ohrenschall & Ohrenschall, Las Vegas, for appellant.

Robert F. List, Atty. Gen., Carson City, George E. Holt, Dist. Atty., and H. Leon Simon, Chief Deputy, Dist. Atty., Las Vegas, for respondent.



The woman, a Filipino National, was 25 years of age, married and the mother of three children. At approximately 8:15 on the evening of July 13, 1974, she was accosted by a man as she entered her car in the parking lot of the Silver Nugget in North Las Vegas, Nevada. Two hours prior to this fateful encounter she had arrived at the gambling establishment to play keno. She was intending to return home when the man, later identified as Dean Jackson Hudson, walked up behind her, grabbed her by the elbow, pressed what she believed to be a knife against her back and threatened to kill her if she did not do as he ordered. He then escorted her to his automobile. Upon reaching his pickup truck, he opened the door on the driver's side of the vehicle and pushed the woman inside. After himself entering the vehicle, Hudson administered several punches to the abdominal area of the victim inducing her to temporarily lose consciousness.

Hudson drove towards the outskirts of town and proceeded to a remote desert area where he stopped. He then grabbed the woman by the hair and commanded her to disrobe. She refused and, attempting to escape, struggled with Hudson striking him on the mouth and causing his lip to bleed. This incident prompted him to convey further threats of death or injury to the victim if she did not comply with his demands.

Ultimately, the young women was subdued. With Hudson's assistance she removed her clothes and was ordered to lie down on the seat of the car. In tears, she complied with the demand and Hudson proceeded to forcibly engage her in the act of sexual intercourse. After Hudson ejaculated in her vagina, he wiped off his penis and ordered his victim to engage him in the act of fellatio. Ignoring her protestations, he thrust his penis into her mouth and removed it only when she began emitting a choking sound. At that point, she attempted once again to escape. Hudson pursued and caught her and, clutching her by the hair, informed her that if she tried to escape again he would kill her. The victim was then shoved into the back of the truck and told to dress.

A short time later, the woman was released in the vicinity of the Silver Nugget and, as Hudson drove away, she was able to discern the license plate number of his automobile.

Frantic and dishevelled, she arrived home at approximately 10:00 p.m. Her husband transported her to the hospital where she was examined and treated. Her injuries included lacerations to an elbow and knee and bruises on her feet, legs, back, buttocks, arms, face and head. Tests disclosed the presence of semen in her vagina.

The following day, Hudson was summoned to the North Las Vegas Police Department where he was confronted by the woman who identified him as her assailant. He was thereupon admitted to police custody and on July 18, 1974, a criminal complaint was issued charging him with the commission of three crimes: (1) second-degree kidnapping committed with the use of a deadly weapon 1 (2) rape, and (3) the infamous crime against nature.

Predictably, Hudson's version of the events which culminated in his arrest differed from that of the victim. He claimed that he met the woman while playing blackjack at the Silver Nugget. During the course of an ensuing conversation of sorts, Hudson invited her to dinner. The two left the establishment in his car and proceeded to his apartment where he picked up some additional money. After stopping at the apartment, located behind his parent's house, they drove to the Golden Nugget. There they gambled but did not eat. Leaving the Golden Nugget approximately 45 minutes after their arrival for the ostensible purpose of returning the woman to the Silver Nugget where she said she expected to meet some friends to play bingo, they detoured to a remote desert area where he parked the car. Hudson contends that the couple then began kissing which, after a short while, led to lovemaking. He claimed that the woman willingly yielded to his advances and denied that the two ever engaged in the act of fellatio.

Following this erotic interlude, Hudson returned her to the Silver Nugget and then proceeded home where he spent the remainder of the relevant hours of the evening watching television with his parents and a friend. From beginning to end, Hudson claimed that the entire episode lasted approximately three hours (from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.).

After a trial before a jury which obviously did not choose to accept Hudson's version of the events, he was found guilty of all three of the crimes of which he was charged. This appeal followed.

Hudson attacks his conviction in 'scatter-gun' fashion specifying 11 separate points of error, five of which will not be entertained for his failure to raise them during the trial. Sherman v. State, 89 Nev. 77, 506 P.2d 417 (1973). See Sollars v. State, 73 Nev. 343, 319 P.2d 139 (1957). After reviewing each of the five issues raised for the first time on this appeal, we have concluded that none are so fundamental as to suggest that the lower court proceedings did not comport with the requirements of due...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Jones v. State, 12844
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • October 17, 1985
    ...See, e.g., St. Pierre v. State, 96 Nev. 887, 620 P.2d 1240 (1980); Wilkins v. State, 96 Nev. 367, 609 P.2d 309 (1980); Hudson v. State, 92 Nev. 84, 545 P.2d 1163 (1976). In a capital case where the record is sufficiently developed to provide an adequate basis for review and to demonstrate t......
  • Redeford v. State, 9478
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • December 22, 1977
    ...given reminded the individual jurors not to surrender conscientiously held opinions for the sake of judicial economy. See Hudson v. State, 92 Nev. 84, 545 P.2d 1163 (1976); Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Basurto v. State, 86 Nev. 567, 472 P.2d 339 (1970); State v. Hall,......
  • Ransey v. State, 10064
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • May 16, 1979
    ...[95 Nev. 367] Basurto v. State, 86 Nev. 567, 472 P.2d 339 (1970); Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Hudson v. State, 92 Nev. 84, 545 P.2d 1163 (1976); State v. Hall, 54 Nev. 213, 13 P.2d 624 (1932). In Redeford v. State, 93 Nev. 649, 572 P.2d 219 (1977) we found that the A......
  • Dutton v. State, 9886
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • July 26, 1978
    ...Dutton neither objected to Page 859 the instructions given nor requested additional clarifying instructions. See, e. g., Hudson v. State, 92 Nev. 84, 545 P.2d 1163 [94 Nev. 466] (1976); Geer v. State, 92 Nev. 221, 548 P.2d 946 (1976). Nor do we agree that the court was required to sua spont......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT