The Court determined that (1) the State presented sufficient evidence for a jury to convict Guitron of incest and sexual assault, (2) the district court did err by not allowing Guitron to introduce evidence of the victims sexual knowledge, but this error was harmless, (3) the district court did err refusing to give the jury Guitron’s requested inverse elements instruction, but this error was also harmless, and (4) Guitron could not show that the district court erred by denying his Batson challenge.
Dhalla, Aleem, "Summary of Guitron (Miguel) v. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (May 21, 2015)" (2015). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 870.