Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): (stating in dicta that “the granting of credit for pretrial confinement is not necessarily limited to the situations discussed in Anglin'’). 2 See generally NRS 176.055(1) (“whenever a sentence of imprisonment ... is imposed, the court may order that credit be allowed against the duration of the sentence ... for the amount of time which the defendant has actually spent in confinement before conviction”). 3 See NRS 34.724(2)(c); NRS 176.555. 4 See Franklin v. State, 110 Nev. 750, 877 P.2d 1058 (1994) (claims appropriate for direct appeal, including a challenge to the sentence imposed, must be pursued on direct appeal or will be considered waived), overruled on other grounds by Thomas v. State, 115 Nev. 148, 979 P.2d 222 (1999); see also Parrish v. State, 116 Nev. 982, 12 P.3d 953 (2000) (<HOLDING>). 5 111 Nev. 1172, 1176, 901 P.2d 639, 642 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that a sentence imposed within statutory limits will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court (B) holding that rulings on admissibility of evidence are within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent a showing of abuse of that discretion (C) holding the district attorney is vested with the sole discretion as to what crimes will be charged and that discretion will not be disturbed absent a gross abuse of discretion (D) holding that a sentencing determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion by the district court (E) holding that the admission or exclusion of evidence is within discretion of the trial court and that such determinations will not be disturbed on appeal absent clear abuse of discretion
Output (English): holding that a sentence imposed within statutory limits will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court