From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Jul 22, 2013
No. 62290 (Nev. Jul. 22, 2013)

Opinion

No. 62290

07-22-2013

MAURICE KING, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.


An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of pandering of a child, pandering: furnishing transportation to a minor, and child abuse and neglect. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; David B. Barker, Judge.

Appellant Maurice King contends that the district court erred by denying his motion for acquittal made at the close of the State's case. The district court properly construed King's request as a motion for an instruction advising the jury to acquit. See NRS 175.381(1)-(2); State v. Combs, 116 Nev. 1178, 1180, 14 P.3d 520, 521 (2000). Sufficient evidence supports King's convictions, see NRS 200.508(1), (4)(a); 1997 Nev. Stat., ch. 137, § 2, at 295-96; 1997 Nev. Stat., ch. 137, § 4, at 297; see also NRS 432B. 110(1), and he fails to demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion, Milton v. State, 111 Nev. 1487, 1493, 908 P.2d 684, 688 (1995) the decision to issue an advisory instruction lies within the district court's discretion). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Although we filed the fast track statement and appendix submitted by King, they fail to comply with the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure. The footnotes in the fast track statement are not in the same size and typeface as the brief and the fact section refers to matters in the record without specific citation to the appendix. Further, the appendix does not contain a single alphabetical index for all documents and the included transcripts are not in chronological order. See NRAP 3C(e)(1)(C), (e)(2)(C); NRAP 30(c)(1)-(2); NRAP 32(a)(5). We caution King's counsel that future failure to comply with the rules of this court may result in the imposition of sanctions. NRAP 3C(n).

__________, J.

Hardesty
__________, J.

Parraguirre
__________, J.

Cherry
cc: Hon. David B. Barker, District Judge

The Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C.

Attorney General/Carson City

Clark County District Attorney

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

King v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Jul 22, 2013
No. 62290 (Nev. Jul. 22, 2013)
Case details for

King v. State

Case Details

Full title:MAURICE KING, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Jul 22, 2013

Citations

No. 62290 (Nev. Jul. 22, 2013)

Citing Cases

King v. State

Further, trial counsel did raise the issue of the denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal on direct…