Monroe (Anthony) v. State ( 2015 )

 1150 (1997) ("A district judge may, in his or her discretion, refuse to accept
guilty pleas."); Graves v. State, 112 Nev. 118, 124, 912 P.2d 234, 238 (1996)
(explaining that this court gives deference to a district court's "face-to-
face" interactions with a defendant during a plea canvass).
Second, Monroe contends that the district court erred by
denying his motion for a new trial. See NRS 176.515. We review a district
court's decision whether to grant a new trial for an abuse of discretion.
State v. Carroll, 109 Nev. 975, 977, 860 P.2d 179, 180 (1993). After
Monroe was convicted, he claimed that he received a letter from the victim
recanting his trial testimony and moved for a new trial based upon the
recantation. The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing, wherein
the victim recanted his recantation, explaining that he drafted the false
letter with Monroe's help to "cover his own back." The district court
concluded that the victim's trial testimony was truthful and denied
Monroe's motion for a new trial. See Callier v. Warden, 111 Nev. 976, 990,
901 P.2d 619, 627-28 (1995) (explaining the factors relevant to a motion
for a new trial based upon a recantation). We conclude that the district
court did not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
Parraguirre
J. , J.
Cherry
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge
David Kalo Neidert
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e