Smith v. State (1996)
green
· 24 citation events
across 1 courts.
Showing the 8 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2013 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201320192026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
WITTER (WILLIAM) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-DIRECT) (2019)
Accord Roe v. State, 112 Nev. 733, 2Witter's appeal from that decision is pending in Docket No. 73431. 4 736, 917 P.2d 959, 960-61 (1996); Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873, 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996).
green
Gallon (Lashae) Vs. State (2019)
District courts have wide discretion in criminal sentencing decisions, Chavez v. State, 125 Nev. 328, 348 , 213 P.3d 476, 490 (2009), and we will not disturb a sentence that is within statutory limits unless the district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information," Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996).
green
Barr (Anthony) Vs. State (2020)
The record shows that the district court did not consider Barr's speedy-trial invocation or rely on highly suspect or irnpalpable information, but rather made its sentencing decision after considering arguments by defense counsel and the State, Barr's statement, a victim irnpact statement, and Barr's prior felonies that formed the basis for his habitual criminal treatment." See Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996) (explaining that this court will no…
explaining that this court will not disturb a sentence that is within statutory limits unless the district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information"
green
Bond, Jr. (Carl) v. State (2019)
This court has consistently afforded district courts wide discretion in criminal sentencing decisions, Chavez v. State, 125 Nev. 328, 348 , 213 P.3d 476, 490 (2009), and will not disturb a sentence that is within statutory limits unless the district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information," Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996).
green
Leahy (Andrew) v. State (2019)
This court has consistently afforded district courts wide discretion in criminal sentencing decisions, Chavez v. State, 125 Nev. 328, 348 , 213 P.3d 476, 490 (2009), and will not disturb a sentence that is within statutory limits unless the district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information," Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996).
green
Slaatte v. State (2013)
E.g., Washington v. State, 112 Nev. 1067, 1075 , 922 P.2d 547, 551-52 (1996); Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996); Roe v. State, 112 Nev. 733, 736 , 917 P.2d 959, 960-61 (1996); Botts, 109 Nev. at 569 , 854 P.2d at 857 .
green
Lemos (Carl) Vs. State (2020)
See Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871, 873 , 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996) (providing that this court may disturb a sentence within statutory limits only if district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information").
providing that this court may disturb a sentence within statutory limits only if district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information"
green
Taylor (Terrell) Vs. State (2019)
See Smith v. State, 112 Nev. 871 , SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 11 (0) 1447A G 873, 920 P.2d 1002, 1003 (1996) (providing that this court may disturb a sentence within statutory limits only if district court relied on "highly suspect or impalpable information").