Menendez (Alex) v. State

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: June 13, 2013
• Docket: 62021
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

witness' opinion testimony limited to opinions or inferences that are ationally based on the perception of the witness; and [h] elpful to a clear understanding of the testimony of the witness or the determination of a fact in issue"); we conclude that any error was harmless, see NRS 178.598; Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 776 (1946) (stating that test for review of nonconstitutional trial error is whether it "had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict"); Knipes v. State, 124 Nev. 927, 935, 192 P.3d 1178, 1183 (2008), considering the substantial evidence pointing to appellant's guilt, including his admission to entering the victims' home and taking property and the discovery of some of the stolen property in appellant's residence. We further conclude that the district court's curative instruction to the jury was sufficient to remedy any prejudice from the error. See Miller v. State, 121 Nev. 92, 99, 110 P.3d 53, 58 (2005) (explaining that instructing jury to disregard improper statements remedies any potential for prejudice); Summers v. State, 122 Nev. 1326, 1333, 148 P.3d 778, 783 (2006) (court presumes that jurors followed instructions). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

,J.

Cherry 1 7\4./Liz

cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge Hawkins, Boley & Aldabbagh Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A