Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bushnell v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided September 12, 1979No. 10136Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partManoukian, J.

I concur in the majority’s holding and its treatment of the jury misconduct issue. NRS 50.065(2); NRS 48.0125; Barker v. State, 95 Nev. 309, 594 P.2d 719 (1979). However, 1 respectfully dissent from that part of the opinion which labels as harmless error the trial court’s refusal to allow the full cross-examination of Sloan, an admitted participant in the robbery, who became a crucial witness for the state. I believe that my brethren have failed to afford to appellant the extent of justice to which he is entitled.

As part of the state’s case in chief, Sloan testified that he and Bushnell…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Douglas v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Greene v. McElroySupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  5. Alford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931

12 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