Case ID: nev_91/html/0753-01.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

ANDREW WENTWORTH GATES, Appellant, v. SHERIFF, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA, Respondent.
    No. 8068
    November 21, 1975
    542 P.2d 736
    
      Morgan D. Harris, Public Defender, and Stephen L. Huf-faker and Herbert F. Ahlswede, Deputy Public Defenders, Clark County, for Appellant.
    
      Robert List, Attorney General, Carson City; George Holt, District Attorney, and H. Leon Simon, Deputy District Attorney, Clark County, for Respondent.
   OPINION

Per Curiam:

In this appeal, Andrew Wentworth Gates contends that the capital murder statute under which he was charged is unconstitutional because of vagueness, and he further challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to hold him for trial on a capital murder charge. We reject both contentions.

Appellant’s constitutional challenge was considered and rejected by this court in Sheriff v. Smith, 91 Nev. 729, 542 P.2d 440 (1975). In our view, the quantum and quality of the evidence adduced at the preliminary examination justified the magistrate’s order holding the appellant for trial. NRS 171.206. State v. Fuchs, 78 Nev. 63, 368 P.2d 869 (1962); Ervin v. Leypoldt, 76 Nev. 297, 352 P.2d 718 (1960); Raggio v. Bryan, 76 Nev. 1, 348 P.2d 156 (1960); Ex parte Liotard, 47 Nev. 169, 217 P. 960 (1923); In re Kelly, 28 Nev. 491, 83. P. 223 (1905).

The order of the district court denying appellant’s petition for habeas corpus is affirmed. 
      
      NRS 200.030, subsection 1(e), as amended, Stats. Nev. 1973, ch. 798, § 5, at 1803:
      “1. Capital murder is murder which is perpetrated by:
      “(e) Killing more than one person as the result of a common plan, scheme or design.”