Ali (Shair) v. State
This text of Ali (Shair) v. State (Ali (Shair) v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
alleges were removed from his cell. See Wolfe v. State, 95 Nev. 240, 242,
591 P.2d 1155, 1156 (1979).
Second, Ali contends that his guilty plea was not entered
knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently because he pleaded guilty based
upon the promise that he would remain free on bail while awaiting
sentencing. We decline to consider this assertion because it challenges the
validity of the plea and is not properly raised on direct appeal. See Bryant
v. State, 102 Nev. 268, 272, 721 P.2d 364, 367-68 (1986).
Third, Ali contends that the district court abused its discretion
by permitting several attorneys to withdraw without his consent and
denying newly appointed counsel's requests for continuances to prepare
for sentencing. We disagree. The record reflects that at least one of the
substitutions of counsel was done at Ali's Tequest after he retained
counsel, and another substitution occurred after counsel withdrew and the
court appointed counsel to represent Ali. The record also reflects that the
court continued the hearing multiple times between September 25, 2013,
and February 12, 2014. At sentencing, counsel indicated that he had
discussed the case with Ali, prepared a sentencing memorandum, and was
ready to proceed. Ali fails to demonstrate that the district court abused its
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1047A discretion. See Dixon v. State, 94 Nev. 662, 664, 584 P.2d 693, 694 (1978).
Having concluded that no relief is warranted, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 1
AO-A t-et4; Hardesty
Cita Douglas Cherry
cc: Second Judicial District Court, Department 6 Douglas A. Nutton Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk
1 Ali'sfast track statement fails to comply with the Nevada Rules of Appellate procedure because it is not double-spaced, see NRAP 3C(h)(1); NRAP 32(a)(4), and makes factual statements without adequate citation to the record, see NRAP 3C)(e)(1)(C). We caution counsel that future failure to comply with this court's briefing requirements may result in the imposition of sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n).
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ali (Shair) v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ali-shair-v-state-nev-2014.