State v. Skaug
| Decision Date | 15 November 1945 |
| Docket Number | 3429. |
| Citation | 163 P.2d 130,63 Nev. 59 |
| Parties | STATE v. SKAugust |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
On petition for rehearing.
Petition denied.
For former opinion, see 161 P.2d 708.
Alan Bible, Atty. Gen., George P. Annand and Homer Mooney, Deputy Attys. Gen., and Melvin E. Jepson, Dist Atty., of Reno, for respondent.
Martin J. Scanlan, of Reno, for appellant.
The points made in the petition for rehearing were all disposed of, and we think correctly, in our former opinion consequently a rehearing if granted would serve no useful purpose. We will refer only to one question.
The argument is made that this court reached an erroneous conclusion in holding that the admission of evidence of offenses unconnected with the crime charged did not constitute reversible error. We pointed out in our original opinion that this was so because all the evidence independent of these other offenses, was so conclusive of appellant's guilt of murder of the first degree under cruel circumstances, that their admission had not resulted in a miscarriage of justice, or actual prejudice to him in respect to a substantial right. There is not anything in the petition or otherwise that causes us to doubt the soundness of our ruling. In this connection it is urged, as it was orally and in counsel's briefs on the hearing of the appeal, that if the other offenses had not been admitted in evidence the jury might have fixed the punishment at confinement in the state prison for life. We disposed of that argument also in the original opinion. The contention is merely a guess and we are not inclined to speculate concerning it. The contention would have the court indulge a presumption in favor of the appellant without any legitimate basis for the inference. This we cannot do. The statute (§ 11266, N.C.L.) places the burden on the appellant to show an error of the kind authorizing this court to set aside the judgment. As we said in State v. Williams, 47 Nev. 279-285, 220 P. 555, 557: State v. Willberg, 45 Nev. 183, 200 P. 475, and State v. Ramage, 51 Nev 82, 269 P....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pacheco v. State
...prejudicial.' Citing State v. Kassabian, 69 Nev. 146, 148, 243 P.2d 264 (1952); State v. Skaug, 63 Nev. 59, 66, 161 P.2d 708, 163 P.2d 130 (1945). Our function, of course, is to insure that all defendants receive a fair trial. To that end, we view each assignment of error with particularity......
-
State v. Teeter
...* * * I should turn you over to the police for bringing that stuff in my place.' In State v. Skaug, 63 Nev. 59, 64, 161 P.2d 708, 710, 163 P.2d 130, this court 'It is well settled that evidence that accused has committed another crime independent of and unconnected with the one for which he......
-
Walker v. State
...guilty or as to the penalty fixed, even if the errors which we recognize had not been committed. State v. Skaug, 63 Nev. 59, 161 P.2d 708, 163 P.2d 130; cf. Garner v. State, 78 Nev. 336, 374 [78 Nev. 474] P.2d 525. In other words, it may not be said that any substantial right of appellant w......
-
State v. Bourdlais, 3743
...does not correctly state the law.' See also: State v. Sheeley, 63 Nev. 88, 97, 162 P.2d 96; State v. Skaug, 63 Nev. 59, 68, 161 P.2d 708, 163 P.2d 130; State v. Burns, 27 Nev. 289, 294, 74 P. The court did not err in refusing to give the above proposed instruction. Defendant next contends t......