Fisher (Darryl) v. State
Fisher (Darryl) v. State
Opinion
reason," to do so by demonstrating that the plea was not entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. Crawford v. State, 117 Nev. 718, 721-22, 30 P.3d 1123, 1125-26 (2001). Because Fisher does not allege, and the record does not demonstrate, that the constitutional violation which occurred prior to his guilty plea affected the knowing, voluntary, or intelligent nature of the plea, we conclude that this claim lacks merit. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 1
fc--Lt Hardesty
Parraguirre
J.
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge Nguyen & Lay Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk
'The fast track response does not comply with NRAP 3C(h)(1) and NRAP 32(a)(4) because the text is not double-spaced. Counsel for the State is cautioned that the failure to comply with the briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n).
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished