Jackson (Anthony) v. State
This text of Jackson (Anthony) v. State (Jackson (Anthony) 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
957, 1000-01 (1991) (plurality opinion). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion at sentencing, and we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 1
Saitta
cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk
1 Thefast track statement submitted by Jackson fails to comply with the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure because the fact section does not contain any citations to the record. See NRAP 3C(e)(1)(C); NRAP 28(e)(1). Counsel for Jackson is cautioned that the failure to comply with the briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n); Smith v. Emery, 109 Nev. 737, 743, 856 P.2d 1386, 1390 (1993).
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 A-A 1947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jackson (Anthony) v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-anthony-v-state-nev-2014.