Carley (Elizabeth) v. State

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: January 15, 2015
• Docket: 66034
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

clear showing of an abuse of discretion." Riker v. State, 111 Nev. 1316, 1322, 905 P.2d 706, 710 (1995) (internal quotation marks omitted). Appellant contends that she was coerced into the plea because her counsel told her that she would lose if she went to trial and her codefendant's counsel informed her that he would blame the offenses on her if she went to trial. The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing, noted that appellant had denied any coercion during the plea canvass, and found that her claim of coercion was belied by the record and her plea was entered knowingly and voluntarily. The written plea agreement and transcripts of the plea canvass and evidentiary hearing support the district court's finding that appellant's plea was voluntary. See Crawford, 117 Nev. at 722, 30 P.3d at 1126 ("A thorough plea canvass coupled with a detailed, consistent, written plea agreement supports a finding that the defendant entered the plea voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently."). Thus, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's motion to withdraw her guilty plea. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

, J. Parraguirre

J. Douglas

C hita Cherry

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (C9 1.947A e cc: Hon. Douglas Smith, District Judge JZS Law Group Roy L. Nelson, III Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) I947A