Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

HAROLD GENE LAWSON, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, RESPONDENT.

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Appellant's sole contention in this appeal suggests we should reverse a judgment of conviction and sentence because the trial judge refused to give a requested jury instruction which did not accurately state the applicable law.

He has cited no relevant authority in support of the contention; and, in fact the law is otherwise. See Harris v. State, 83 Nev. 404, 407, 432 P.2d 929, 931 (1967), where we said: ". . . [R]equested instructions must properly state the law. The appellant can claim no right to have requested instructions given when they do not correctly state the law. Without such right a refusal is not error." See also, State v. Sheeley, 63 Nev. 88, 162 P.2d 96 (1945).

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LAWSON v. STATE
(Aug 26, 1975)