Opinion
No. 65338
05-22-2015
VERNON R. THOLKE, 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An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority.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 entered pursuant to a jury verdict of lewdness with a child under the age of fourteen years. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; David A. Hardy, Judge.
Appellant Vernon Tholke claims the district court committed plain error by admitting into evidence a statement he made during a police interview. He argues the statement was the product of "police intimidation and was made without a clear waiver or expression of understanding of his Miranda rights." However, the alleged error does not appear plainly on the record. See Saletta v. State, 127. ___, ___, 254 P.3d 111, 114 (2011) (describing plain error review).
Instead, the record reveals Tholke agreed to talk with the police, a friend drove him to the police station, a detective advised him of his Miranda rights, he indicated that he understood those rights, and he participated in a voluntary interview. See Silva v. State, 113 Nev. 1365, 1370, 951 P.2d 591, 594 (1997) (the mere fact an interview took place in a police station does not mean the suspect was in custody for Miranda purposes). Moreover, the record reveals Tholke's interview statement was presented to the jury by way of a video recording and Tholke expressly stipulated to the admission of the video recording. See Rhyne v. State, 118 Nev. 1, 9 & n.12, 38 P.3d 163, 168 & n.12 (2002) (a defendant is estopped from raising alleged errors on appeal if he invited those errors in the court below). Given this record, we conclude Tholke has not demonstrated plain error, and we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Silver
cc: Hon. David A. Hardy, District Judge
Richard F. Cornell
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk