In this case, the Court considered two issues related to DUI charges against appellant. First, whether a jury may return a general guilty verdict based upon several legally sufficient theories of driving under the influence if at least one theory had sufficient evidentiary support. Second, whether the appellant was prejudiced by the State’s failure to gather evidence during its investigation. After a review of the evidence presented at trial, the Court concluded that a jury may return a general guilty verdict even when only one of several theories had sufficient support, and that the appellant here was not prejudiced by the State’s failure to gather particular evidence during its investigation.
Loveland, Bryce C., "Summary of Gordon v. State, 121 Nev. Adv. Op. 51" (2005). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 586.