Author: Jeff Jaeger

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.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 15, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 15, 2018

FELTON VS. DOUGLAS CTY.

  • Should a worker’s compensation claimant who is injured during the course of volunteer work, who also has concurrent private employment, have his average monthly wage based solely on his “deemed wage” from volunteer work, or is he entitled to have his deemed wage be aggregated with earnings from his concurrent private employment.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 8, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 8, 2018

QUINN VS. DIST. CT. (SINATRA)

  • Does a Nevada district court have authority to compel an out-of-state attorney to appear in Nevada for a deposition as a nonparty witness in a civil action pending in Nevada state court where the attorney has appeared pro hac vice in the action.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 1, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for February 1, 2018

SFR INV.’S POOL 1, LLC VS. FIRST HORIZON HOME LOANS

  • How do the notice provisions of NRS 116.31162 apply amidst competing foreclosure sales by a bank and a homeowner’s association.

 CASTILLO VS. UNITED FED. CREDIT UNION

  • Is aggregation of putative class member claims permitted to determine jurisdiction.
  • Can a claim for statutory damages be combined with a claim for the elimination of the deficiency amount asserted to determine jurisdiction.
  • Does an assertion of injunctive relief establish jurisdiction.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 11, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 11, 2018

OKADA VS. DIST. CT. (WYNN RESORTS, LTD.)

  • Does the gaming privilege in NRS 463.120(6), which protects certain information and data provided to the gaming authorities, apply to information requested before the effective date of the statute.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 4, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 4, 2018

HEAT & FROST INSULATORS AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 16 VS. LABOR COMM’R

  • Does untimely service of a petition for judicial review of an administrative decision on the Attorney General, pursuant to NRS 233B.130(2)(c)(1), mandate dismissal of the petition.
  • Does NRS 233B.130(5)’s mandate that service of a petition for judicial review on the Attorney General be effected within 45-days, preclude a petitioner from moving for an extension of time after the 45-day period has passed.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

What is a “deadly weapon” within the context of battery?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

hand holding a screwdriver

Rodriguez (Daniel) vs. State (Nev. Supreme Ct. – Dec. 28, 2017)

At issue in this appeal was the definition of “deadly weapon” within the context of battery. Rodriguez contended the jury instruction that led to his conviction for battery with the use of a deadly weapon was erroneous because the object he used to stab his victim – a screwdriver – was not designed to be inherently dangerous.

Rodriguez used a screwdriver to stab a 66-year-old man in the neck. The screwdriver was four to six inches long. It broke through the victim’s skin, causing bleeding and one night of hospitalization. The State charged Rodriguez with battery with the use of a deadly weapon, causing substantial bodily harm, against a person at least sixty years of age.

Prior to trial, Rodriguez repeatedly contested the deadly weapon allegation, arguing that a screwdriver could not meet the narrow definition of deadly weapon he claimed applied to 200.481(2)(e), which governs the crime of battery with the use of a deadly weapon. The district court rejected Rodriguez’s motions to dismiss the deadly weapon allegation.

Continue reading “What is a “deadly weapon” within the context of battery?” →

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 28, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 28, 2017

MCCROSKY VS. CARSON TAHOE REG’L MED. CTR.

  • Under what circumstances can a hospital be vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of a doctor who works at the hospital as an independent contractor.
  • Can evidence of Medicaid payments made on behalf of a plaintiff be introduced in a medical malpractice action.

BOCA PARK MARKETPLACE SYNDICATIONS GRP., LLC VS. HIGCO, INC.

  • Does the doctrine of claim preclusion prevent a tenant from suing its landlord for contract damages after having won an earlier suit against the landlord for declaratory judgment, where both suits concern the same underlying facts.

BROWN (WILLIS) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)

  • What is the standard for determining indigency for the appointment of counsel for purposes of Widdis.
  • Must an indigent defendant request a sum certain before a motion for defense services at public expense can be considered or granted

SEGOVIA, PA-C VS. DIST. CT. (DUDA)

  • Do the 2015 Legislature amendments, adding physician assistants to NRS 41A.017, apply retroactively so as to cap their damages in medical malpractice actions.

EUREKA CTY. VS. DIST. CT. (SADLER RANCH, LLC)

  • Are junior water rights holders entitled to notice of and an opportunity to participate in a district court’s consideration of a curtailment request.

RODRIGUEZ (DANIEL) VS. STATE

  • What is the definition of “deadly weapon” within the context of battery.

HAWKINS VS. DIST. CT. (GGP MEADOWS MALL)

  • What should a district court  consider when awarding attorney fees sought for work done by a disqualified firm.

PECK VS. VALLEY HOSP. MED. CTR.

  • Does either statutory res ipsa loquitur or the common knowledge res ipsa loquitur doctrine provide an exception to the expert affidavit requirement for a medical malpractice complaint.
  • Is NRS 41A.071 unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause or Due Process Clause, facially, or as applied to inmates or indigent persons.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.