Santana v. State

I concur in the majority’s conclusion that NRS 207.190 must be examined under an objective standard and in its reversal of Santana’s convictions based on the failure to properly instruct the jury. However, I write separately to address the sentence Santana received following his first trial, and I take this last opportunity to object to a grave deficiency in this court’s criminal jurisprudence that I have criticized many times during my tenure on this court— this court’s continual refusal to review criminal sentences for excessiveness.1

In most criminal cases, after reviewing all of the…