The Court determined that 1) multiple convictions under NRS 202.285(1) are not redundant because the word discharges illustrates the legislature’s intent to separately punish each violation of the statute; 2) the State sufficiently proved beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury the charges against Washington; and 3) using the term “unnamed coconspirator” is allowed in a conspiracy charge and the identity of the unnamed does not need to be proven in order to charge other.
Conlin, Elise, "Washington v. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 65 (Aug. 12, 2016)" (2016). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1001.