Samuel (Tyrone) v. State ( 2014 )

 wearing a blue shirt and black pants. A surveillance videotape from the
gas station, played for the jury, showed a black male grabbing the
envelopes from the victim's back pocket and running away. The clerk
directed the officers to where he saw Samuel discard the envelopes—the
envelopes were recovered and the victim identified them as his.
A description of the suspect was disseminated and the officers
were soon directed to the Gold Spike Hotel based on information provided
by the hotel desk clerk. The officers proceeded to the room where the
guest identified by the desk clerk was located in order to do "a knock and
talk," and Samuel answered the door, wearing a blue shirt and black
pants. LVMPD Officer Bryce Jones testified that he read Samuel his
rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and
confronted him with the details of the investigation, to which Samuel
responded, "yeah, I did that." Samuel indicated that he spent some of the
money, including $350 to reserve the hotel room for four nights, and that
he still had some of it—a wallet containing $3,003 was found in his
possession. Samuel stated that he gave some of the money to a woman
present in the hotel room—$202 was found in her possession. Officer
Jones testified, "I did ask him why he did what he did and he stated
that—at first that he didn't know what was in the envelopes but that he
had a good idea. And, he went on to state that he was homeless and
broke."
Circumstantial evidence alone may sustain a conviction.
Buchanan v. State, 119 Nev. 201, 217, 69 P.3d 694, 705 (2003). It is for
the jury to determine the weight and credibility to give conflicting
testimony, McNair v. State, 108 Nev. 53, 56, 825 P.2d 571, 573 (1992), and
a jury's verdict will not be disturbed on appeal where, as here, sufficient
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A e
evidence supports the verdict, Bolden v. State, 97 Nev. 71, 73, 624 P.2d 20,
20 (1981); see also NRS 193.167(1)(j); NRS 205.270(1)(b). Therefore, we
conclude that Samuel's contention is without merit. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.'
J.
Hardesty
.:1===x.A1 , J.
Douglas
J.
cc. Hon. Carolyn Ellsworth, District Judge
Law Office of Scott P. Eichhorn, LLC
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
'The fast track statement fails to comply with NRAP 3C(h)(1) and
NRAP 32(a)(4) because it does not contain 1-inch margins on all four sides.
Counsel for Samuel is cautioned that the failure to comply with the
briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of
sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 194M ea>