Spencer v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Spencer v. State

498 P.2d 1335, 88 Nev. 392, 1972 Nev. LEXIS 478

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedJune 29, 1972

Docket6752

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 498 P.2d 1335 (Spencer 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.

Bluebook

Spencer v. State, 498 P.2d 1335, 88 Nev. 392, 1972 Nev. LEXIS 478 (Neb. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Convicted of robbery, appellant first assigns as error the district court’s refusal to change venue from Pershing County, *393 where the crime occurred, to some place where there are more members of appellant’s race. “[A] jury verdict violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment only if it can be shown that members of the appellant’s race were excluded systematically from jury duty.” Collins v. State, 88 Nev. 168, 170, 494 P.2d 956, 957 (1972). Here, the fact no members of appellant’s race were on the jury resulted, not from their systematic exclusion, but from appellant’s decision to commit a crime in a county where only one resides.

Appellant also contends he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a confrontation shortly after his arrest, but before he was charged. The right he claims does not exist. Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877 (1972); Baker v. State, 88 Nev. 369, 498 P.2d 1310 (1972). Other assignments of error are equally without merit.

Since counsel for the appellant was appointed by the district court to handle this appeal, we direct that court to compensate counsel as provided by NRS 7.260.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Convicted of robbery, appellant first assigns as error the district court’s refusal to change venue from Pershing County, *393 where the crime occurred, to some place where there are more members of appellant’s race. “[A] jury verdict violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment only if it can be shown that members of the appellant’s race were excluded systematically from jury duty.” Collins v. State, 88 Nev. 168, 170, 494 P.2d 956, 957 (1972). Here, the fact no members of appellant’s race were on the jury resulted, not from their systematic exclusion, but from appellant’s decision to commit a crime in a county where only one resides.

Appellant also contends he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a confrontation shortly after his arrest, but before he was charged. The right he claims does not exist. Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682, 92 S.Ct. 1877 (1972); Baker v. State, 88 Nev. 369, 498 P.2d 1310 (1972). Other assignments of error are equally without merit.

Since counsel for the appellant was appointed by the district court to handle this appeal, we direct that court to compensate counsel as provided by NRS 7.260.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

498 P.2d 1335, 88 Nev. 392, 1972 Nev. LEXIS 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spencer-v-state-nev-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack