Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Cooper V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 104 (Dec. 27, 2018), Christi Dupont
Cooper V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 104 (Dec. 27, 2018), Christi Dupont
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that removing a potential juror on the basis of race is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause and held that the district court erred when it did not find a prima facie showing of race-based discrimination during the jury selection process.
State V. Second Judicial Dist. Court. (Hearn (Matthew)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 96 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Taylor Buono
State V. Second Judicial Dist. Court. (Hearn (Matthew)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 96 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Taylor Buono
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court affirmed the district court’s decision and held that the prosecutorial consent provision in NRS 176A.290 violated the Nevada Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine. Furthermore, the Court struck the offending language, finding that the provision could be severed from the statute without impacting the legislature’s intent.
Granada-Ruiz V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (Aug. 2, 2018) (En Banc), Sara Schreiber
Granada-Ruiz V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (Aug. 2, 2018) (En Banc), Sara Schreiber
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court concluded that double jeopardy did not prohibit the appellant’s retrial because he had implied consent to the district court’s declaration of a mistrial. Further, it held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding manifest necessity to declare a mistrial. Thus, the Court denied the appellant’s petition for a writ of mandamus that would direct the district court to grant his motion to dismiss and bar his re-prosecution.
Las Vegas Review-Journal V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 7 (Feb. 27, 2018), Matthew J. Mckissick
Las Vegas Review-Journal V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 7 (Feb. 27, 2018), Matthew J. Mckissick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the First Amendment does not allow a court to prevent the press from reporting on a redacted autopsy report already released to the public.