Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Other Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Other Law

Office Of The Attorney General V. Justice Court (Escalante), 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (Apr. 6, 2017), Kristopher Kalkowski Apr 2017

Office Of The Attorney General V. Justice Court (Escalante), 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (Apr. 6, 2017), Kristopher Kalkowski

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that NRS 30.130, which concerns the Attorney General’s right to be notified and an opportunity to be heard in constitutional challenges to Nevada statutes, does not apply to criminal proceedings. Instead, NRS 30.130 only refers to a proceeding for declaratory relief, which is treated as a civil action.


The Myopia Of U.S. V. Martinelli: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction In The 21st Century, Christopher L. Blakesley Jan 2007

The Myopia Of U.S. V. Martinelli: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction In The 21st Century, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Beginning in January 1999 and continuing through January 2000, a U.S. soldier began frequenting an off-post Internet cafe in Darmstadt, Germany, called the Netzwork Café. There he would download images of child pornography and search Internet websites, logging onto Internet chat rooms in order to communicate with individuals willing to send him images of naked children and children engaged in sex acts.

Specialist Martinelli was eventually caught and charged with various violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A for knowingly mailing, transporting or shipping child pornography in interstate or foreign commerce (by computer); knowingly receiving child pornography that had been mailed, …


Empirical Studies Contribute To Death Penalty Debate, Joan W. Howarth Jan 2002

Empirical Studies Contribute To Death Penalty Debate, Joan W. Howarth

Scholarly Works

At a time of renewed scrutiny of capital punishment, Nevada lawyers may be interested in some of the recent legal scholarship on the death penalty based on social science data, rather than on legal philosophy or constitutional theory. Three projects are of particular interest: Professor James Liebman's work on errors in death penalty cases; the National Jury Project's data about how jurors decide capital cases; and David Baldus' recent study of peremptory challenges in capital cases.