From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamlet v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada
Dec 9, 1968
447 P.2d 492 (Nev. 1968)

Opinion

No. 5570

December 9, 1968

Appeal from judgment of the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; John F. Mendoza, J.

James D. Santini, Public Defender, and George D. Frame, Deputy Public Defender, Clark County, for Appellant.

Harvey Dickerson, Attorney General, George F. Franklin, Jr., District Attorney, and George H. Spizzirri, Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.


OPINION


We are asked to set aside the appellant's conviction for possession of heroin on the ground that the prosecutor referred to the fact that the appellant, at about the same time he was arrested for that crime, also was arrested for possession of narcotics paraphernalia, a separate and distinct offense. Such a reference was made by the prosecutor during his opening statement, and again during jury summation, each time without objection by defense counsel. When testimony was offered on the point, objection was interposed by defense counsel, sustained by the court, and the jury admonished to disregard. The evidence of appellant's guilt is overwhelming. In this context we are unable to find prejudicial error.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Hamlet v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada
Dec 9, 1968
447 P.2d 492 (Nev. 1968)
Case details for

Hamlet v. State

Case Details

Full title:FLOYD HAMLET, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Date published: Dec 9, 1968

Citations

447 P.2d 492 (Nev. 1968)
447 P.2d 492

Citing Cases

Revuelta v. State

Any error, if it was error, was rendered harmless when, upon objection and motion of defense counsel, the…

Lingo v. State

After each such reference, the trial court admonished the jury that they were to disregard such statements,…