Tag: NRS 193.167

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 6, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 6, 2018

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (HEARN (MATTHEW))

  • Is the prosecutorial veto within NRS 176A.290, which authorizes a district court to assign certain eligible defendants to a veterans court program, unconstitutional.

RODRIGUEZ (JUAN) VS. STATE

  • Is NRS 200.481(2)(b) an enhancement statute such that battery causing substantial bodily harm cannot be enhanced for committing a crime against a person 60 years of age or older under NRS 193.167.

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (OJEDA (FRANCISCO))

  • Does a district court have authority to order the State to disclose veniremember criminal history information it acquires from a government database that is unavailable to the defense.

LAKE TAHOE PROTECTION DIST. VS. BD. OF ADMIN.

  • Does NRS 616B.578 require an employer to prove that it had knowledge of a specific diagnosis of an employee’s preexisting condition to qualify for reimbursement on a worker’s compensation claim.

O’KEEFE VS. STATE, DEP’T OF MOTOR VEHICLES

  • What is the correct standard of review that a hearing officer must apply to a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) disciplinary decision to terminate an employee.

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.