Hankins v. State
This text of 538 P.2d 167 (Hankins 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
Thurman Hankins was convicted by a jury of rape, infamous crime against nature and burglary. His sole contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict on the rape charge.
Although Hankins testified that the victim consented to the sexual act, the jury chose to believe the prosecution witnesses, and not Hankins’ version of the incident.
When there is conflicting testimony presented, it is for the jury to determine what weight and credibility to give to the testimony. “Where there is substantial evidence to support a *478 verdict in a criminal case, as the record indicates in this case, the reviewing court will not disturb the verdict nor set aside the judgment.” Sanders v. State, 90 Nev. 433, 529 P.2d 206 (1974). See also, Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Crowe v. State, 84 Nev. 358, 441 P.2d 90 (1969).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
538 P.2d 167, 91 Nev. 477, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hankins-v-state-nev-1975.