Month: March 2018

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 29, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 29, 2018

SOUTHWORTH VS. DIST. CT. (LAS VEGAS PAVING CORP.)

  • Is the time to appeal outlined in the Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedure (JCRCP), specifically the time set forth in JCRCP 98, jurisdictional and mandatory, therefore removing from the district court’s jurisdiction an untimely appeal from justice court.

COMSTOCK RESIDENTS ASS’N VS. LYON CTY. BD. OF COMM’RS

  • Does the Nevada Public Records Act (NPRA) exempt public records maintained on private devices or servers from disclosure.

KING, P.E. VS. ST. CLAIR

  • What constitutes sufficient evidence of a prior owner’s intent to abandon a water right.

NULEAF CLV DISPENSARY, LLC VS. STATE, DEP’T. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERV.’S

  • Must NRS 453A.322(3)(a)(5)’s requirement that an applicant seeking to obtain a medical marijuana establishment registration certificate obtain approval from the local government where the establishment is to be located certifying that the applicant is in compliance with applicable zoning restrictions and building requirements, be satisfied before an applicant can receive a registration certificate.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 15, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 15, 2018

MILLER VS. MILLER

  • What is the appropriate application and interpretation of Nevada’s child support statutes where both parents share joint physical custody of one child, but one parent has primary physical custody of the other child.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Does the 6th Amendment guarantee the right to cross-examine a witness?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Attorney cross-examining a witness

State vs. Dist. Ct. (Baker (Jeffrey)) (Nev. Supreme Ct. – Mar. 1, 2018)

The issue is whether a defendant had an adequate opportunity to cross-examine a witness when, immediately after the State’s direct examination at the preliminary hearing, the defendant waived his right to continue the preliminary hearing.

Baker stood accused of one count of sexually motivated coercion and eight counts of lewdness with a child under the age of 14. At the preliminary hearing, Baker’s cousin, C.J., testified in detail regarding two instances in which Baker attempted to engage her in sexual activity. The first instance occurred when C.J. was 11 years old; the second when she was 13. Baker was well into his 20s on both occasions.

During the preliminary hearing, when C.J. finished testifying, the justice court said, “All right. Cross.” Instead of beginning cross-examination, Baker’s attorney asked for the court’s indulgence as he conferred off the record with the prosecutor. He then announced: “Today pursuant to negotiations, Mr. Baker will unconditionally waive his preliminary hearing. In district court he’ll plead guilty to one count of attempt[ed] lewdness with a minor.” After canvassing Baker, the justice court accepted his unconditional waiver of the remainder of the preliminary hearing.

Continue reading “Does the 6th Amendment guarantee the right to cross-examine a witness?” →

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 1, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 1, 2018

STATE, DEP’T. OF BUS. AND INDUS., FIN. INST. DIV. VS. DOLLAR LOAN CTR., LLC

  • Can a payday loan licensee sue to collect on the recovery of a loan made for the purpose of refinancing prior loans under NRS 604A.480(2).

ZENOR VS. STATE, DEP’T OF TRANSP.

  • Are attorney fees prohibited under NRS 18.010(2)(b) in petitions for judicial review of an agency determination.

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (BAKER (JEFFREY))

  • Did a defendant have “an adequate opportunity” to cross-examine a witness when, immediately after the State’s direct examination at the preliminary hearing, the defendant waived his right to continue the preliminary hearing.

ANDREWS (RYAN) VS. STATE

  • Does the simultaneous possession of different schedule I controlled substances constitute separate offenses under NRS 453.3385 or must the weight of the controlled substances be aggregated to form a single offense.

PAWLIK VS. DENG

  • Does NRS 271.595, a statute governing redemption of property sold for default on city tax assessments, create two consecutive redemption periods.

K-KEL, INC. VS. STATE, DEP’T OF TAXATION

  • Did the court lack jurisdiction to consider petitions for judicial review of the Nevada Tax Commission regarding a tax refund request because they were untimely.

DEZZANI VS. KERN & ASSOC.’S, LTD. C/W 69410

  • Can an attorney be held liable for a claim under NRS 116.31183 as an agent of a common-interest community homeowners’ association.
  • Can attorneys litigating pro se and/or on behalf of their law firms recover attorney fees and costs.

JEREMIAS (RALPH) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-DIRECT)

  • Did the district court violate the defendant’s right to a public trial by closing the courtroom to members of the public during jury selection without making sufficient findings to warrant the closure.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 27, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 27, 2018

THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL VS. DIST. CT. (HARTFIELD)

  • Does the First Amendment permit a court to enjoin the press from reporting on a redacted autopsy report already in the public domain.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.