MENTABERRY v. STATE (2022)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Mentaberry argues that the trial court committed plain error by failing to strike two jurors that knew members of the victim's family, the trial court committed plain error by permitting the admission of hearsay, and the jury's verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence. “[I]n an appeal taken from an amended judgment of conviction, the appellant may only raise challenges that arise from the amendments made to the original judgment of conviction.” Jackson v. State, 133 Nev. 880, 882, 410 P.3d 1004, 1006 (Ct. App. 2017). Mentaberry does not raise a challenge to the changes made to the corrected judgment of conviction. Rather, Mentaberry's claims challenge the original judgment of conviction and could have been raised in an appeal from the original judgment of conviction. Accordingly, Mentaberry waived these claims by not raising them in an appeal from his original judgment of conviction, and we

ORDER the corrected judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.