Morris (Linal) v. State ( 2014 )

 not demonstrated that the information regarding his juvenile commitment
was obtained from sealed records." While Morris argues that the district
court's conclusion that he has violence in his background was based upon
untrue assumptions put forth by the prosecutor, Morris has not
demonstrated that the district court relied solely on impalpable or highly
suspect evidence, see Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161
(1976), as his adult criminal history includes convictions for violent
offenses. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its
discretion at sentencing, and we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
CLA.A.ctsr, J.
Parraguirre
J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge
Washoe County Alternate Public Defender
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
'Notably, Morris cites to Nevada statutes regarding a California
commitment.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947 em
ft13.1%