Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Coles (Brent) V. Bisbee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 62. (Aug. 2, 2018), Tamara Cannella
Coles (Brent) V. Bisbee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 62. (Aug. 2, 2018), Tamara Cannella
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that the use of the Static-99R assessment conforms with the assessment requirements under NRS 213.1214. It additionally determined that modifications to parole procedures do not constitute an ex post facto violation unless the changes create a significant risk of prolonging an inmate’s incarceration.
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.