Evidence Commons^™

State V. Carroll, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 23 (Apr. 7, 2016), Jessie Folkestad

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Defendant Deangelo Carroll appealed from a conviction for conspiracy to commit murder and first-degree murder with use of a deadly weapon. The Supreme Court of Nevada found the district court erred in denying Carroll’s motion to suppress his statements to police because the police subjected Carroll to a custodial interrogation, without advising him of his Miranda rights. The Court affirmed however, finding the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Rish V. Simao, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Mar. 17, 2016), Heather Caliguire

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court held that the District Court wrongly excluded evidence of low-impact defense when it required a biomechanical expert testify about the nature of the accident, erroneously interpreting Hallmark v. Eldgridge Instead, Hallmark requires sufficient foundation for admission of testimony and evidence, specifically excluding a biomechanical expert’s testimony under NRS 50.275. The Court additionally held that the District Court erred when it ultimately struck the defendant’s answer for violations of the pretrial order precluding defendant from raising a minor or low impact defense.

Quisano V. State, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 9 (February 18, 2016), Michael Hua

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This court affirmed an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to an Alford plea, of voluntary manslaughter and child abuse, neglect, or endangerment with substantial bodily harm holding:

(1) Brady violations do not occur when the evidence in question is not favorable to the defendant;

(2) Prosecutors have a strict duty to disclose under their own open-file policy until sentencing proceedings; and,

(3) Media outlets require a written by the district court to electronically cover proceedings unless nonconstitutional or harmless error results in such coverage.

Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals often testify as forensic experts in civil commitment and criminal competency proceedings. When an individual clinician assumes both a treatment and a forensic role in the context of a single case, however, that clinician forms a dual relationship with the patient—a practice that creates a conflict of interest and violates professional ethical guidelines. The court, the parties, and the patient are all affected by this conflict and the biased testimony that may result from dual relationships. When providing forensic testimony, the mental health professional’s primary duty is to the court, not to the patient, …

Barber V. State, 131 Nev. Adv, Op. 103 (December 31, 2015), Ronni N. Boscovich

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from a district court conviction. The Court reversed the Eighth Judicial District Court’s judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict of burglary and grand larceny. The juvenile court retains jurisdiction over Barber because the legislation did not include language regarding jurisdiction stripping or dismissal requirements. However, the Court reversed the judgment because the prosecution presented insufficient evidence to support Barber’s conviction.

Moultrie V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 93 (Dec. 24, 2015), Cassandra Ramey

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court of Appeals determined that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the State to file an information by affidavit more than 15 days after the preliminary examination concluded, when the justice court committed an “egregious error,” and “the defendant was discharged but not prejudiced by the delay.” Further, the Court defines “egregious error” as when “a charge was erroneously dismissed or a defendant was erroneously discharged based on a magistrate’s error.” Due to the justice court’s egregious errors in the preliminary examination that resulted in appellant’s discharge, the Court found that the district court was …

Berry V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 96 (Dec. 24, 2015), Brittany L. Shipp

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The issue before the Court was an appeal from a district court order dismissing a post-conviction petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court reversed and remanded holding that the district court improperly discounted the declarations in support of the appellant’s petition, which included a confession of another suspect, whom the petitioner implicated as the real perpetrator at trial. The Court held that these declarations were sufficient to merit discovery, and an evidentiary hearing on Petitioner Berry’s gateway actual innocence claim.

Valenti V. Nev. Dep’T Of Motor Vehicles, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Nov. 5, 2015), Shannon Diaz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that a “chemist” as defined by NRS § 50.320must be qualified as an expert in a Nevada court of record prior to the admission of his or her affidavit attesting to an individual’s blood-alcohol concentration in a driver’s license revocation hearing

Summary Of Guitron (Miguel) V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (May 21, 2015), Aleem Dhalla

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) the State presented sufficient evidence for a jury to convict Guitron of incest and sexual assault, (2) the district court did err by not allowing Guitron to introduce evidence of the victims sexual knowledge, but this error was harmless, (3) the district court did err refusing to give the jury Guitron’s requested inverse elements instruction, but this error was also harmless, and (4) Guitron could not show that the district court erred by denying his Batson challenge.

Summary Of Mitchell V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 63076 (Apr. 30 2015), Stacy Newman

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Original petition for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to sustain the privileges asserted by a defendant doctor in a medical malpractice case to his personal counseling and treatment records was granted and denied in part. The court determined 1) Mitchell’s family and marital therapy records were privileged 2) Mitchell’s doctor-patient records were subject to NRS 49.245(3) patient-litigation exception, but 3) the doctor-patient records should have been reviewed in camera by the district court before discovery.

Evaluating The Evaluation: Reliance Upon Mental Health Assessments In Cases Of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse, Sarah F. Shelton

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Hiding The Elephant: How The Psychological Techniques Of Magicians Can Be Used To Manipulate Witnesses At Trial, Sydney A. Beckman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Leavitt V. Siems, 130 Adv. Nev. Op. 54, Michael Paretti

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court concluded that: (1) expert alternative causation testimony is permissible; (2) ex parte communication, even when improper, only warrants a new trial when prejudice is established; and, (3) an employee’s default may not be used against an employer codefendant contesting liability.

Summary Of L.V. Dev. Assocs. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 37, Ryan Becklean

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether NRS 50.125 applies to depositions.

Summary Of Coleman V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 26, Ryan Becklean

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined three issues: (1) whether there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction of first-degree murder by child abuse; (2) whether NRS 51.345 is constitutional; and (3) whether NRS 51.345 was properly applied by the trial court to exclude testimony in this case.

This Is Your Sword: How Damaging Are Prior Convictions To Plaintiffs In Civil Trials?, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Deirdre Bowen

Scholarly Works

The conventional wisdom in law is that a prior conviction is one of the most powerful and damaging pieces of evidence that can be offered against a witness or party. In legal lore, prior convictions seriously undercut the credibility of the witness and can derail the outcome of a trial. This Article suggests that may not always be true.

This Article details the results of an empirical study of juror decision-making that challenges the conventional wisdom about prior convictions. In our study, the prior conviction evidence did not have a direct impact on the outcome of the civil trial or …

Summary Of State V. Kincade, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 102, Shaina Plaksin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the district court properly excluded evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that did not comply with NRS 179.045(5) because it failed to include either a statement of probable cause or the affidavit upon which probable cause was based.

Summary Of Perez V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 90, Collin Jayne

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined the admissibility of expert testimony on “grooming behavior” by accused sexual offenders and the effect that this behavior has on child victims.

Testifying Minors: Pre-Trial Strategies To Reduce Anxiety In Child Witnesses, Dawn Hathaway Thoman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Holmes V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 59, Brian Vasek

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the fairness of a criminal trial was compromised by the district court’s admission into evidence of: (1) rap lyrics that the accused wrote while in jail; (2) a co-conspirator’s out-of-court statement that the accused “went off” and “just started shooting”; and (3) unwarned statements that the accused made to Nevada detectives who interviewed him out of state.

Summary Of Rugamas V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 46, Brittany K. Puzey

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging a district court order denying a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on alleged deficiencies in the grand jury proceedings.

Summary Of Newman V. State, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 24, Sara Stephan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a jury conviction in the Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County, of battery by strangulation and willfully endangering a child as a result of child abuse. The Nevada Supreme Court addressed two issues both rooted in NRS 48.045’s prohibition against using character or prior-bad-act evidence to prove criminal propensity. The defendant did not mount a conventional accidental injury defense to the child abuse charge and admitted to possessing an aggressive character, eliminating the relevance for evidence showing this to be true.

Summary Of Tri-County Equipment & Leasing V. Klinke, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 33, Daniella Labounty

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court considered whether proof of workers’ compensation payments paid in California could be admitted into evidence in a personal injury action in Nevada. Because both states have statutes governing this issue, the Court decided that the Nevada statute shall govern. Applying Nevada law, the Court concluded that evidence of the actual amount of the benefits paid should be admitted and a clarifying jury instruction should have been given.

Summary Of Davis V. Beling, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 28, Colin Seale

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered, on appeal, whether a court can admit evidence of compromise offers within real estate transactions for the purpose of demonstrating a failure to mitigate damages. Further, it considered whether real estate licensees are shielded from all forms of common law liability. Lastly, the Court considered whether compensatory damages should include diminution-in-value for a claim alleging fraud, whether carrying costs as consequential damages should be limited by the economic loss doctrine, and whether the district court erred in denying attorney’s fees provided for in listing and purchase agreements to the prevailing party.

Summary Of Bigpond Vs. Nevada, 128 Nev. Advanced Opinion No. 10, Emily Navasca

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered an appeal from a district court regarding admission of evidence of “other crimes, wrongs or acts” for non-propensity purposes not listed in NRS 48.045(2).

Summary Of Reno Newspapers V. Gibbons, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. 23, Daniel M. Ryan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considers whether after a public records lawsuit commences, when a party requests records from a state entity, and that state entity withholds the requested records, is the requesting party entitled to a log containing a factual description of each withheld record and a legal basis for nondisclosure. Also, the Court considers what the state entity withholding records is required to provide to the requesting party in prelitigation situations.

Injecting Law Student Drama Into The Classroom: Transforming An E-Discovery Class (Or Any Law School Class) With A Complex, Student-Generated Simulation, Paula Schaefer

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tangible "Intangibles" And Other Mysteries: A Critique Of The D.C. Circuit's Expansion Of Work Product Doctrine In United States V. Deloitte Llp, Brian L. Blaylock

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Unpredictable And Inconsistent: Nevada's Expert Witness Standard After Higgs V. State, Ryan A. Henry

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Williams V. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 45, Ryan Johnson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Two consolidated petitions for writs of mandamus dealing with the admission of evidence and expert medical testimony.