79603 - KNIGHT (WILBERT) VS. STATE

Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 10:00 AM
Duration: 30 min

Location: Las Vegas

Details/Synopsis: This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of conspiracy to commit robbery, two counts of invasion of the home while in possession of a deadly weapon, two counts of burglary while in possession of a deadly weapon, two counts of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, first degree kidnapping with use of a deadly weapon, two counts of first degree kidnapping with the use of a deadly weapon, victim 60 years of age or older, robbery with use of a deadly weapon, two counts of robbery with use of a deadly weapon, victim 60 years of age or older, battery with intent to commit a crime, victim 60 years of age or older, and battery victim 60 years of age or older, and possession of stolen property. Appellant Wilbert Knight, together with two other men, was arrested in connection to a series of three violent home invasions. The robbers took jewelry, money, and other valuables, physically assaulted the victims in each case, and sexually assaulted female victims present during the first two home invasions. DNA evidence, eyewitness testimony, and/or the recovered property tied Knight to the first home invasion, but not all three. The district court declined to sever Knight's trial from that of a co-defendant. At trial, Knight was found guilty by the jury on counts related to the first and third home invasions. He was acquitted of all charges related to the second home invasion. The district court sentenced Knight to an aggregate term of life with the possibility of parole after 53 years. ISSUES: Whether (1) the district court erred by allowing codefendant's counsel to represent appellant at a severance hearing where appellant argues there was a conflict of interest; (2) the district court erred by refusing to sever the codefendants in this matter where appellant argues there was a close familial relationship and adversarial defense strategies necessitating severance; (3) the district court abused discretion by convicting appellant of offenses which he argues there was insufficient evidence to support; (4) the district court erred when it determined there was sufficient evidence to convict appellant of kidnapping, because movement of the victims was incidental to robbery charges; (5) the State committed prosecutorial misconduct by implicating guilt by association and referencing facts outside of admitted evidence at a sentencing hearing; (6) the district court erred by impermissibly directing witness testimony; and (7) the district court abused its discretion by sentencing appellant based on highly suspect or impalpable evidence. (Disclaimer: This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: http://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do)