A three-judge panel of the Court considered three questions: (1) whether NRS 484E.010-030 require actual knowledge that an accident has occurred, or whether constructive knowledge is sufficient; (2) whether the definition of “involved in an accident” in the same statute is unconstitutionally vague or ambiguous; and (3) whether the evidence in this case was sufficient to support the guilty verdict handed down in the lower court.
Hoffman, Jim, "Summary of Clancy v. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 89" (2013). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 35.