Legal Opinion · Dissent

Donald v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1996No. 23980Published

1DissentSpringer, J.

The district court instructed the jury that it should find appellant guilty if it found that appellant possessed a controlled substance with the intent to sell or distribute it. NRS 453.337, under which appellant was convicted, prohibits possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell, but does not mention distribution. Specifically, NRS 453.337(1) provides in relevant part that “it is unlawful for any person to possess for the purpose of sale any controlled substance classified in schedule I or II.” The *351instruction is erroneous because it allows the jury to make a finding of guilt…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Guy v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Barren v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Culverson v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Cotter v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1987

5 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