SALDANA v. STATE (2020)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

Javier Angel Saldana appeals from a judgment of conviction entered pursuant to a guilty plea of failure to stop on the signal of a peace officer. Third Judicial District Court, Lyon County; John Schlegelmilch, Judge.

Saldana claims the district court abused its discretion by basing its restitution award on highly suspect evidence. He argues that “when [he] expressed concern about the value of loss and want for a restitution hearing, the district court defended the victim impact statement and numbers contained therein, and showed frustration that [he] would even question said amount.” And he asserts the numbers and values submitted by the victim are highly suspect because there were “no supporting documents, no market analysis, and no basis of origin.”

However, the record plainly demonstrates that Saldana told the district court that he was not contesting the restitution and he did not need a restitution hearing. Therefore, we conclude he has forfeited this claim of error, and we decline to review it for plain error. See Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. 46, 52, 412 P.3d 43, 49 (2018) (“[T]he decision whether to correct a forfeited error is discretionary.”), cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 415 (2018). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.