Turpen v. State, 9998
| Decision Date | 25 August 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 9998,9998 |
| Citation | 583 P.2d 1083,94 Nev. 576 |
| Parties | Dennis O. TURPEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Dennis O. Turpen stands convicted, by jury verdict, of the first degree murder of Johnie Sue Hicks, a female companion with whom he had been sharing a motor home in Reno, Nevada (NRS 200.010; NRS 200.030). In this appeal, Turpen contends (1) the district court erred in admitting certain photographs into evidence; (2) the district court erred in failing to give a proposed instruction; (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict; and, (4) he was denied effective assistance of counsel. We find no merit in these contentions.
1. Appellant contends gruesome autopsy photographs depicting various wounds on the victim's body should not have been admitted into evidence because their prejudicial effect outweighed any probative value. Admissibility of such photographs lies within the sound discretion of the district court and, absent an abuse of that discretion, the decision will not be overturned. Dearman v. State, 93 Nev. 364, 566 P.2d 407 (1977). Here, the court followed the intermediate cautionary review procedure recently approved in Dearman v. State, supra, considered arguments of counsel, and thereafter concluded that "because of the overall picture and circumstances involved in this case, (the photographs) would be helpful to the jury . . . ." Under these circumstances, we perceive no abuse of the trial court's discretion in admitting the photographs.
2. Appellant next contends the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter. Appellant has failed to include the proposed instruction in the record, thus precluding appellate review of this issue. Anderson v. State, 81 Nev. 477, 406 P.2d 532 (1965).
3. Appellant also argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction because the record contains no proof of premeditation and deliberation.
Premeditation and deliberation are questions of fact for the jury and may be deduced from the facts and circumstances surrounding the killing. Curtis v. State, 93 Nev. 504, 568 P.2d 583 (1977). This case involved a brutal beating evidenced by multiple bruises, cuts and lacerations. The pathologist testified to thirty-one (31) separate injuries, including subdural hematoma. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flores v. State
...17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 45. Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279, 113 S.Ct. 2078, 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993). 46. Turpen v. State, 94 Nev. 576, 577, 583 P.2d 1083, 1084 (1978). 47. Wesley v. State, 112 Nev. 503, 512, 916 P.2d 793, 799 48. Leonard v. State, 117 Nev. 53, 63, 17 P.3d 397, 403-0......
-
Robins v. State
...797, 800 (1984). Absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court, the decision will not be overturned on appeal. Turpen v. State, 94 Nev. 576, 577, 583 P.2d 1083, 1084 (1978). In the instant case, following an objection by counsel, the trial court reviewed the photographs and [I]t appears ......
-
Pressler v. State
... ... conspiracies" instruction in the appendix on appeal, his ... claim is waived. Turpen u. State, 94 Nev. 576, ... 577-78, 583 P.2d 1083, 1083 (1978) (concluding that the ... appellant's failure to include a proposed ... ...
-
Redmen v. State, 21729
...100 Nev. 167, 172, 679 P.2d 797, 800 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1009, 105 S.Ct. 1372, 84 L.Ed.2d 390 (1985); Turpen v. State, 94 Nev. 576, 577, 583 P.2d 1083, 1084 (1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 968, 99 S.Ct. 460, 58 L.Ed.2d 428 (1978). Having examined the photographs, we conclude that ......