the evening prior to the incident. We conclude that the evidence
supporting this conviction, when viewed in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, is sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as
determined by a rational trier of fact. See NRS 200.366(1); Jackson v.
Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); McNair v. State, 108 Nev. 53, 56, 825
P.2d 571, 573 (1992).
Appellant also claims that his verdicts of guilty as to the
sexual assault charge and not guilty as to the burglary charge are
inconsistent and are not rationally reconcilable, and therefore they cannot
stand. We have held that inconsistent verdicts are permitted when
supported by sufficient evidence. See Greene v. State, 113 Nev. 157, 173-
74, 931 P.2d 54, 64 (1997), receded from on other grounds by Byford v.
State, 116 Nev. 215, 235, 994 P.2d 700, 713 (2000). As we have resolved
appellant's sufficiency challenge against him, we conclude his claim of
inconsistent verdicts is without merit. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
,J.
Hardesty
Parraguirre
cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge
Scott W. Edwards
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe County District Attorney
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A