Case ID: nev_91/html/0477-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THURMAN HANKINS, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
    No. 7800
    July 23, 1975
    538 P.2d 167
    
      Morgan D. Harris, Public Defender, and Robert D. Larsen, Deputy Public Defender, Clark County, for Appellant.
    
      Robert List, Attorney General; George E. Holt, District Attorney, and Dan M. Seaton, Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.
   OPINION

Per Curiam:

Thurman Hankins was convicted by a jury of rape, infamous crime against nature and burglary. His sole contention on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict on the rape charge.

Although Hankins testified that the victim consented to the sexual act, the jury chose to believe the prosecution witnesses, and not Hankins’ version of the incident.

When there is conflicting testimony presented, it is for the jury to determine what weight and credibility to give to the testimony. “Where there is substantial evidence to support a verdict in a criminal case, as the record indicates in this case, the reviewing court will not disturb the verdict nor set aside the judgment.” Sanders v. State, 90 Nev. 433, 529 P.2d 206 (1974). See also, Azbill v. State, 88 Nev. 240, 495 P.2d 1064 (1972); Crowe v. State, 84 Nev. 358, 441 P.2d 90 (1969).

Affirmed.