From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hankins v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada
Jul 23, 1975
91 Nev. 477 (Nev. 1975)

Opinion

No. 7800

July 23, 1975

Appeal from Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Joseph S. Pavlikowski, Judge.

Morgan D. Harris, Public Defender, and Robert D. Larsen, Deputy Public Defender, Clark County, for Appellant.

Robert List, Attorney General; George E. Holt, District Attorney, and Dan M. Seaton, Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.


OPINION


Thurman Hankins was convicted by a jury of rape, infamous crime against nature and burglary. His sole contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict on the rape charge.

Although Hankins testified that the victim consented to the sexual act, the jury chose to believe the prosecution witnesses, and not Hankins' version of the incident.

When there is conflicting testimony presented, it is for the jury to determine what weight and credibility to give to the testimony. "Where there is substantial evidence to support a verdict in a criminal case, as the record indicates in this case, the reviewing court will not disturb the verdict nor set aside the judgment." Sanders v. State, 90 Nev. 433, 529 P.2d 206 (1974). See also, Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Crowe v. State, 84 Nev. 358, 441 P.2d 90 (1969).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Hankins v. State

Supreme Court of Nevada
Jul 23, 1975
91 Nev. 477 (Nev. 1975)
Case details for

Hankins v. State

Case Details

Full title:THURMAN HANKINS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Date published: Jul 23, 1975

Citations

91 Nev. 477 (Nev. 1975)
538 P.2d 167

Citing Cases

Wicker v. State

1. Wicker argues that his conviction cannot stand because the evidence presented at the trial was…

Vasquez v. State

Therefore, although the jury could have credited Vasquez's self-defense argument, there was sufficient…