Ellison v. State
This text of 479 P.2d 461 (Ellison 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
OPINION
A jury found Ellison guilty of cattle theft. We are asked to void the conviction because the prosecutor expressed his belief that the defendant was guilty. The evidence of guilt was substantial. Its sufficiency is not questioned. The court instructed the jury that counsel’s statements were not evidence. The prosecutor’s several statements suggesting guilt and his belief therein were made in relation to evidence pointing to guilt. Cf. State v. Cyty, 50 Nev. 256, 256 P. 793 (1927). Although the prosecutor should not have expressed his belief, his statements, within the context of this case, were harmless. NRS 177.255. 1
Affirmed.
Other assigned errors are not considered since no supporting authority is offered and none concern constitutional rights.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
479 P.2d 461, 87 Nev. 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ellison-v-state-nev-1971.