— 2 —
impalpable or highly suspect evidence at sentencing, see Denson v. State, 112 Nev. 489, 492, 915 P.2d 284, 286 (1996), we conclude that this claim lacks merit. Hybarger also argues that the district court abused its discretion by failing to state on the record the factors it relied upon when imposing consecutive sentences. NRS 176.035(1) does not require that a sentencing judge make particularized findings when imposing a consecutive sentence, and we decline to exercise our authority to read such a requirement into the statute. See Mendoza-Lobos v. State, 125 Nev. 634, 641, 218 P.3d 501, 506 (2009); see also Hughes v. State, 116 Nev. 327, 333, 996 P.2d 890, 893 (2000) (noting that "this court has never required the district courts to utter 'talismanic' phrases" and instead "looks to the record as a whole to determine whether the sentencing court actually exercised its discretion"). Regardless, the district court noted Hybarger's extensive criminal history and danger to the community before pronouncing sentence. We conclude that this claim lacks merit. Accordingly, we ORDER the judgments of conviction AFFIRMED.
J. Hardesty
P O-4.01t Parraguirre
01.2. Cherry
cc: Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge Washoe County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A
'