Craciun (Robert) v. State

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: October 16, 2013
• Docket: 63060
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

We conclude that appellant has presented nothing more than a bare allegation of error. That Johnson's statement to the prosecutor purportedly incriminated him does not establish that it was exculpatory or otherwise satisfied Brady, see State v. Huebler, 128 Nev. „ 275 P.3d 91, 95 (2012) (explaining the requirements to establish a Brady violation), cert. denied, 568 U.S. , 133 S. Ct. 988 (2013), thereby obligating the prosecutor to disclose it. And it does not appear that Johnson's statement was discoverable under NRS 174.235(1) (obligating the prosecution to disclose written or recorded statements made by witnesses that prosecution intends to call in its case in chief). Moreover, Johnson's name appeared on the prosecution's witness list, and appellant does not suggest that he was unable to interview Johnson in preparation for trial. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Hardesty

J.

cc: Hon. David B. Barker, District Judge Roger P. Croteau & Associates, Ltd. Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk