Legal Opinion

Mendoza v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 2006No. 43390PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Maupin, J.:

In this appeal, we clarify the criteria for dual convictions for kidnapping and robbery when such charges arise from a single course of conduct. We also resolve questions concerning custodial statements to authorities under Miranda v. Arizona, 1 where the accused has not explicitly stated the intent to waive the right to counsel, and the discretion of the district court in limiting cross-examination in criminal cases.

We conclude that the district court adequately instructed the jury with regard to kidnapping charges for which appellant Juan Mendoza stood trial.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. North Carolina v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. People v. DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Rosky v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2005

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. State v. SalamonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
  2. State of Iowa v. Scott Robert RobinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 2015
  3. Pascua v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  4. BELCHER, JR. (NORMAN) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-DIRECT)Nevada Supreme Court · 2020
  5. State of Tennessee v. Jerome Maurice TeatsTennessee Supreme Court · 2015

59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API