Crowley v. State, 120 Nev. 30

Summary

The Nevada Supreme Court held that Crowley's convictions for sexual assault and lewdness with a minor were redundant because the lewd conduct was incidental to the sexual assault and did not constitute a separate act. The court reversed the lewdness conviction and remanded for resentencing, while affirming the other convictions. It also upheld admission of the defendant's wife's prior statement as a prior inconsistent statement and declined to reach the cruel-and-unusual-punishment claim.

Holdings

1. When the acts supporting sexual assault and lewdness with a minor are part of one continuous, uninterrupted episode and the lewd conduct is merely incidental or a prelude to the sexual assault, the convictions are redundant and the separate lewdness conviction cannot stand.
2. A trial witness's failure, for any reason, to remember a prior statement constitutes a denial of that statement and makes it a prior inconsistent statement under NRS 51.035(2)(a). The prior statement is non-hearsay and may be admitted substantively and for impeachment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Crowley's convictions for sexual assault and lewdness with a minor under fourteen were redundant because they arose from a single continuous episode.
2. Whether consecutive sentences for sexual assault and lewdness with a minor constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
3. Whether the district court properly admitted Crowley's wife's prior statement through the investigator as a prior inconsistent statement and non-hearsay.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded