Sparacino (Timothy) v. State

Sparacino failed to object to do not rise to the level of plain error. Before imposing sentence, the district court disclaimed reliance upon all statements which fell outside the scope of NRS 176.015(3). See Buschauer, Nev. at 893, 804 P.2d at 1048. For these reasons, Sparacino fails to demonstrate that the district court violated his right to due process, see id. at 893-94, 804 P.2d at 1048, or abused its discretion at sentencing, see Randell, 109 Nev. at 8, 846 P.2d at 280; Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976) (a district court abuses its discretion if it bases its sentencing determination only upon impalpable or highly suspect evidence). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

kC)i J. Pickering

J. Parraguirre

Saitta cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge

Attorney General/Carson City

Carson City District Attorney

State Public Defender

Carson City Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF

NEVADA kO) 1917A e