Green (Len) v. State ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                    free to leave once detained pursuant to a traffic stop, he is not in custody
    for Miranda purposes unless the encounter escalates into a formal arrest).
    Second, Green contends that the district court erred by
    denying his pretrial motion to suppress his statements to law enforcement
    because they were elicited subsequent to an unconstitutional search. We
    review de novo the district court's legal determination of the
    constitutionality of a search but review its findings of fact for clear error.
    Somee v. State, 
    124 Nev. 434
    , 441, 
    187 P.3d 152
    , 157-58 (2008). Because a
    reasonable officer would have checked on Green's welfare upon learning
    that he was involved in a traffic accident and discovering him
    unresponsive, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying
    Green's motion on this ground. See State v. Rincon, 
    122 Nev. 1170
    , 1175-
    76, 
    147 P.3d 233
    , 237 (2006) (adopting the community caretaking
    doctrine); People v. Ray, 476-77, 
    981 P.2d 928
    , 937 (Cal. 1999) (the
    community caretaking doctrine applies where an objectively reasonable
    officer would have perceived a need to protect a member of the
    community).
    Third, Green contends that the district court abused its
    discretion by allowing witnesses to testify regarding statements that
    Green's girlfriend made at the scene of the accident. We review a district
    court's determination as to whether a statement falls within a hearsay
    exception for an abuse of discretion. Rodriguez v. State, 
    128 Nev. 273
     P.3d 845, 848 (2012). The district court admitted the statements as
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) 1947A
    INSISEIMMISH                   EMENNIMENIMINIM
    excited utterances because they were made shortly after perceiving an
    exciting event while the declarant was under the stress of the event.   See
    NRS 51.095; Rowland v. State, 
    118 Nev. 31
    , 42-43, 
    39 P.3d 114
    , 121
    (2002). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by
    admitting the statements.
    Having considered Green's claims and concluded that they
    lack merit, we
    ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
    Hardesty
    Parraguirre V                             Cherry
    cc: Hon. Alvin R. Kacin, District Judge
    Elko County Public Defender
    Attorney General/Carson City
    Elko County District Attorney
    Elko County Clerk
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    3
    (0) 1947A
    MEE                                            '
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 62486

Filed Date: 6/13/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021