The Court concluded that (1) the empanelment of an anonymous jury does not, without actual prejudice, infringe on a defendant’s constitutional rights and the district court satisfied the abuse-of-discretion standard adopted; (2) the district court need not instruct a jury that is responsible for imposing a sentence in a first-degree murder case under NRS 175.552 about the effects of a deadly weapon enhancement; and (3) there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s decision to admit Menendez-Cordero’s threats as consciousness-of-guilt evidence.
Hagenkord, Nick, "Menendez-Cordero v. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (Jul 25, 2019)" (2019). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1247.