Morris (Linal) v. State

not demonstrated that the information regarding his juvenile commitment was obtained from sealed records." While Morris argues that the district court's conclusion that he has violence in his background was based upon untrue assumptions put forth by the prosecutor, Morris has not demonstrated that the district court relied solely on impalpable or highly suspect evidence, see Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976), as his adult criminal history includes convictions for violent offenses. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion at sentencing, and we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

CLA.A.ctsr, J.

Parraguirre

J. Saitta cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge

Washoe County Alternate Public Defender

Attorney General/Carson City

Washoe County District Attorney

Washoe District Court Clerk

'Notably, Morris cites to Nevada statutes regarding a California commitment.

SUPREME COURT

OF

NEVADA (0) 1947 em ft13.1%