Menendez (Alex) v. State ( 2013 )

 witness' opinion testimony limited to opinions or inferences that are
ationally based on the perception of the witness; and [h] elpful to a clear
understanding of the testimony of the witness or the determination of a
fact in issue"); we conclude that any error was harmless, see NRS 178.598;
Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 776 (1946) (stating that test for
review of nonconstitutional trial error is whether it "had substantial and
injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict"); Knipes v.
State, 124 Nev. 927, 935, 192 P.3d 1178, 1183 (2008), considering the
substantial evidence pointing to appellant's guilt, including his admission
to entering the victims' home and taking property and the discovery of
some of the stolen property in appellant's residence. We further conclude
that the district court's curative instruction to the jury was sufficient to
remedy any prejudice from the error. See Miller v. State, 121 Nev. 92, 99,
110 P.3d 53, 58 (2005) (explaining that instructing jury to disregard
improper statements remedies any potential for prejudice); Summers v.
State, 122 Nev. 1326, 1333, 148 P.3d 778, 783 (2006) (court presumes that
jurors followed instructions). Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
,J.
Cherry
1
7\4./Liz
cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge
Hawkins, Boley & Aldabbagh
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A