Adakai (Nathan) v. State ( 2013 )

 116 Nev. 307, 309-311, 998 P.2d 163, 164-65 (2000) (concluding that
defendant's statements on the record constituted a waiver and obviated
the need for the State to offer proof of his prior convictions); see also
Hodges v. State, 119 Nev. 479, 484, 78 P.3d 67, 70 (2003) (to satisfy due
process concerns prior to habitual criminal adjudication, It] here is less
chance for mistakes or abuse of the stipulation process as long as a
defendant must at least admit that he received specific prior convictions").
At the preliminary hearing, certified copies of the judgments
of conviction and additional documents related to Adakai's two prior
misdemeanor domestic battery convictions were admitted as exhibits; the
additional documents establish the constitutional validity of the prior
convictions. The criminal information filed in the district court listed the
two prior domestic battery convictions. At his arraignment, defense
counsel informed the district court that Adakai was "going to be pleading
to domestic battery, third offense." Upon questioning by the district court,
Adakai admitted to receiving two prior domestic battery convictions. A
review of the arraignment and plea canvass indicates that Adakai fully
understood that he was pleading to third-offense domestic battery. The
State did not offer copies of the prior judgments of conviction into evidence
at the arraignment, however, defense counsel informed the district court
that she "reviewed them, your Honor, and I believe they're legally
sufficient." At the sentencing hearing, there is no indication that the
State offered copies of the prior judgments into evidence. Nevertheless,
we conclude that Adakai's admission and defense counsel's statements
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
constituted a waiver and stipulation to the proof of the two prior
convictions used for enhancement purposes. Therefore, we further
conclude that Adakai is not entitled to relief, and we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 1
/ J.
Hardesty
Parraguirre
J.
cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge
State Public Defender/Carson City
Attorney General/Carson City
Storey County District Attorney
Storey County Clerk
'The fast track statement and response do not comply with NRAP
3C(h)(1) and NRAP 32(a)(4) because the text is not double-spaced.
Counsel for the parties are 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) 1947A