Opinion
Nos. 58980 58981 58982.
12-07-2011
Kyan Christopher SANDERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. Kyan Christopher Sanders, Appellant, v. The State of Nevada, Respondent. Kyan Christopher Sanders, Appellant, v. The State of Nevada, Respondent.
Washoe County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe County Public Defender
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
These consolidated appeals challenge three judgments of conviction, pursuant to guilty pleas, of attempted burglary and two counts of burglary. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Janet J. Berry, Judge. The district court sentenced Sanders to consecutive sentences of 12 to 36 months, 16 to 72 months, and 32 to 90 months, respectively.
Sanders' sole contention on appeal is that the district court abused its discretion by failing to articulate a rationale for imposing consecutive sentences. We conclude that his contention is without merit.
This court has consistently afforded the district court wide discretion in its sentencing decision. See, e.g., Houk v. State, 103 Nev. 659, 664, 747 P.2d 1376, 1379 (1987). Included in the district court's wide discretion is the discretion to impose consecutive sentences. See NRS 176.035(1) ; Warden v. Peters, 83 Nev. 298, 303, 429 P.2d 549, 552 (1967). We will refrain from interfering with the sentence imposed “[s]o long as the record does not demonstrate prejudice resulting from consideration of information or accusations founded on facts supported only by impalpable or highly suspect evidence.” Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976). Although Sanders' sentence is substantial, nothing in the record suggests that district court considered impalpable or highly suspect evidence or other improper matters in imposing consecutive sentences. And the sentence is within the parameters provided by the relevant statutes. NRS 193.330 ; NRS 205.060(1). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in this regard.
Having considered Sanders' contention and concluding that it is without merit, we
ORDER the judgments of conviction AFFIRMED.