According to the guilty plea memorandum, Duran-Robles "reserve RI] the right to challenge the validity of the prior judgment of conviction which gives rise to this offense." On appeal, Duran-Robles contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the criminal information. We disagree. The district court conducted a hearing and found that there was no evidence that Duran-Robles' prior conviction was constitutionally infirm; the documents submitted by the State, "taken as a whole, demonstrate that the [prior] conviction was a felony conviction;" and Duran-Robles "has not rebutted this presumption, nor has he met his burden of proving that his prior conviction was unconstitutional." See Dressler v. State, 107 Nev. 686, 697-98, 819 P.2d 1288, 1295-96 (1991); see also Davenport v. State, 112 Nev. 475, 477-78, 915 P.2d 878, 880 (1996). We also note that any challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was waived by the entry of Duran-Robles' guilty plea. See Webb v. State, 91 Nev. 469, 470, 538 P.2d 164, 165 (1975). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Duran-Robles' motion to dismiss. See Hill v. State, 124 Nev. 546, 550, 188 P.3d 51, 54 (2008) (we review a district court's denial of a motion to dismiss for an abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 4(.749 cc: Hon. Elliott A. Sattler, District Judge Washoe County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A