Appellant Daniel Anthony Ramet was convicted of first-degree murder. On appeal, Ramet contended that the testimony concerning his refusal to consent to a search of his home, taken together with the prosecutor’s comment on it, was violative of his Fourth Amendment rights. The Court concluded that the district court erred in allowing testimony and argument regarding Ramet’s invocation of his Fourth Amendment right. However, they further concluded that the error in admitting the statements was harmless. The Court therefore affirmed Ramet’s conviction.Óÿ
Zimmerman, Tara C., "Summary of Ramet v. State, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 19" (2009). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 370.