Washington v. State
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
After a jury found appellant guilty of robbery, he moved for a new trial. The district court denied appellant’s motion, concluding that NRS 176.515 does not permit a new trial to be granted for insufficiency of the evidence. On appeal, appellant contends, to the contrary, that the court possessed lawful authority to consider his motion. We agree. This matter is reversed and remanded, so that appellant’s motion may be considered in accord with the standard hereinafter set forth.
In denying the appellant’s motion for a new trial, the district judge commented as follows:
I am very well…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hudson v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- State v. BusscherNevada Supreme Court · 1965
- People v. VeitchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Pacific Intermountain Express Co. v. Leonard E. Conrad, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by8 opinions
- Evans v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. PurcellNevada Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. WalkerNevada Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. WilsonNevada Supreme Court · 1988
- Washington v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.