Friday, June 12, 2020 - Las Vegas - J. Gibbons, J. Stiglich, and J. Silver
Jensen vs. Dist. Ct. (Jensen)
Docket Number: 80481
Las Vegas - 10:00 a.m. - Sounthern Nevada Panel
This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order disqualifying counsel from representing petitioner in the underlying post-divorce decree child custody/support modification proceedings and awarding attorney fees. Shane and Caroline Jensen contacted Robert Dickerson from The Dickerson Karacsonyi Law Group for mediation services. Caroline contends she had a separate conversation with Dickerson about child custody and financial matters. Dickerson denies this conversation ever took place. The parties were ultimately divorced and Shane retained The Dickerson Karacsonyi Law Group to handle post-divorce decree issues. Caroline moved to disqualify the firm from representing Shane. The district court agreed and disqualified Shane’s counsel and awarded Caroline attorney fees.
ISSUES:
Whether: (1) the district court arbitrarily and capriciously abused its discretion in disqualifying The Dickerson Karacsonyi Law Group, and (2) the district court abused its discretion in awarding Caroline attorney fees and costs.
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: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do
Carter (Richard) vs. State
Docket Number: 78560
Las Vegas - 10:30 a.m. - Sounthern Nevada Panel
This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of: nine counts of sexual assault with a minor under 14 years of age; five counts of incest; three counts of lewdness with a child under the age of 14; one count of attempted sexual assault of a minor under 14 years of age; and one count of open and gross lewdness. Appellant Richard Carter was arrested and charged for the sexual abuse of his biological daughter, M.F., which occurred over a ten-year period. During trial, the district court granted the State’s challenge for cause to remove a juror upon learning the juror was not forthcoming during voir dire. The district court also admitted a pair of M.F.’s bloodstained, childhood panties into evidence, which the State referred to throughout trial as “bloody panties.” The blood purportedly arose from Carter raping M.F. around the time she was in kindergarten. A detective, that was not assigned to the case, testified at trial about the actions the primary detective on the case took during investigations. The district court sentenced Carter to concurrent and consecutive prison terms totaling 172 years to life. Carter now appeals his conviction.
ISSUES:
Whether (1) the district court abused its discretion by admitting M.F.’s panties into evidence because the panties were not properly authenticated and their introduction was unduly prejudicial; (2) the district court improperly quantified the reasonable doubt standard; (3) the district court improperly removed a juror for cause; (4) the State committed prosecutorial misconduct; (5) the district court abused its discretion by admitting Carter’s mugshot into evidence; (6) the detective’s testimony regarding another detective’s actions during the investigation violated the Confrontation Clause; (7) Carter’s sentence violates the Eighth Amendment; and (8) cumulative error warrants reversal of his conviction.
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: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do