Tag: NRS 200.366

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 16, 2020

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 16, 2020

In re Hughes

  • Did a family court judge violate the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct.
  • What is the appropriate sanction for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct where the violation is not knowing or deliberate and aggravating factors are not present.

Figueroa-Beltran v. United States

  • Is the identity of a substance an element of the crime articulated in NRS 453.333.

Lofthouse v. State

  • Is sexual conduct between certain school employees or volunteers and students who are old enough to consent to sexual conduct an unlawful act perpetrated upon the person of a minor such that it is a predicate offense for first-degree kidnapping.

Pundyk v. State

  • Is psychiatric expert witness testimony regarding a defendant’s mental state admissible for purposes of establishing that the defendant meets the not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity standard under NRS 174.035(6).

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for June 18, 2020

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for June 18, 2020

Droge v. AAAA Two Star Towing, Inc.

  • What conduct, undertaken in the course of a self-help repossession of a vehicle, constitutes a breach of peace such that the privilege to enter real property without judicial process and retake collateral afforded by NRS 104.9609 no longer applies to those engaged in the repossession effort.

Honea v. State

  • Under the 2007 version of Nevada’s sexual assault statute, NRS 200.333, is age alone determinative of nonconsent or of the victim’s ability to resist or understand the nature of the sexual conduct.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Does witness testimony at trial via two-way audiovisual violate a defendant’s right to confrontation?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Picture of a person wiith a TV head

Lipsitz (Ryan) vs. State (Nev. Supreme Ct. – June 6, 2019)

Lipsitz was convicted of seven sexually related counts, including sexual assault and attempted sexual assault. He argued that the district court erred when it allowed the victim to testify by two-way audiovisual transmission, which violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.

Lipsitz trespassed into a residential treatment facility, where he sexually assaulted the victim, an 18-year-old patient seeking treatment for substance abuse and trauma related to her experience as a victim of sex trafficking. On the morning in question, the victim fell asleep while reading in the recreation room around 4 a.m. Approximately one hour later, the victim awoke to find Lipsitz, whom she had never seen before, standing at the end of the couch. Lipsitz exposed himself and forced the victim to have sex with him. Lipsitz then attempted to force the victim to perform fellatio on him. When he failed, he became upset, mumbled something under his breath, and walked away. Another patient and several staff members at the treatment center saw Lipsitz exiting the treatment center through the front gate. He was nearby the center when police officers found him.

Continue reading “Does witness testimony at trial via two-way audiovisual violate a defendant’s right to confrontation?” →

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for June 6, 2019

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for June 6, 2019

ROSE, LLC VS. TREASURE ISLAND, LLC

  • When a written lease is otherwise silent, is the allegedly defaulting party entitled to “strict” or merely “substantial” compliance with the notice requirements set forth in the lease for declaring the party in default.

THE ORIGINAL ROOFING CO., LLC VS. CHIEF ADMIN. OFFICER OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMIN.

  • How must an employer’s knowledge of violative conduct of safety laws by a supervisor be established.

LIPSITZ (RYAN) VS. STATE

  • Does a witness’s testimony at trial via two-way audiovisual transmission violate a defendant’s right to confrontation.
  • Can a defendant be convicted of both sexual assault and attempted sexual assault based on the same conduct.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

When is a defendant entitled to a jury instruction on a lesser included offense?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Lesser Included Offenses

Alotaibi (Mazen) vs. State (Nev. Supreme Ct. – Nov. 9, 2017)

In this appeal, the Supreme Court of Nevada determined whether, under the statutory definitions existing in 2012, the offense of statutory sexual seduction is a lesser-included offense of sexual assault when that offense is committed against a minor under 14 years of age.

The statutes defining statutory sexual seduction and sexual assault were amended in 2015. Under the 2015 amendments, any sexual penetration of a minor under the age of 14 is sexual assault, and it is no longer possible for statutory sexual seduction to be committed against a minor under the age of 14. Therefore, the analysis of the statutory elements in this opinion pertains only to the version of the statutes in place at the time the offenses were committed in 2012.

On the morning of December 31, 2012, Alotaibi arrived at the Circus Circus hotel where his friends had a room. In the hallway outside the hotel room, Alotaibi encountered A.D., a 13- year-old boy who was staying at the hotel with his grandmother. A.D. asked Alotaibi for marijuana, and they went outside the hotel to smoke it. Alotaibi made sexual advances toward A.D. in the elevator and outside the hotel, despite A.D.’s resistance. Alotaibi then offered A.D. money and marijuana in exchange for sex. A.D. testified that he agreed, but intended to trick Alotaibi into giving him marijuana without engaging in any sexual acts.

Continue reading “When is a defendant entitled to a jury instruction on a lesser included offense?” →

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for November 9, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for November 9, 2017

 ALOTAIBI (MAZEN) VS. STATE.

  • Is a statutory element that serves only to determine the appropriate sentence for an offense, but has no bearing as to guilt for the offense, an element of the offense for purposes of the lesser-included-offense analysis.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for October 5, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for October 5, 2017

MENDENHALL VS. TASSINARI

  • Are claims that are brought by the offering party in a second action, and arise out of facts that were discovered after serving the NRCP 68 offer, barred by general principles of claim preclusion or by the very terms of the NRCP 68 offer.

HUMPHRIES VS. NEW YORK-NEW YORK HOTEL & CASINO, LLC

  • When does an innkeeper owe a duty of care for on premises injuries caused by third parties because the wrongful act of a third party was foreseeable.

SWEAT (LONNIE) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)

  • Does a defendant who pleads guilty to a lesser charge pursuant to a plea agreement and fails to comply with the terms of that agreement, waive his or her right to be protected from prosecution on a greater charge.

WILLIAMS (JESSICA) VS. STATE, DEP’T OF CORR.

  • Do credits earned pursuant to NRS 209.4465 apply to eligibility for parole as provided in NRS 209.4465(7)(b) where the offender was sentenced pursuant to a statute that requires a minimum term of not less than a set number of years, but does not mention parole eligibility.

FREDIANELLI VS. MARTINEZ

  • Can an attorney actively enforce a retaining lien.
  • Is an affirmative recovery necessary in the retaining lien context.
  • Can a retaining lien be reduced to a monetary judgment.

JOHNSON (DONTE) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-PC)

  • Must a defendant file a postconviction petition within one year after remittitur issued on direct appeal from his original judgment of conviction where the direct appeal resulted in reversal and remand for another penalty hearing such that his sentences were unsettled.

IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.D.L. AND C.L.B., JR.

  • Are a parent’s Fifth Amendment rights violated when he or she is required to admit to a criminal act in order to maintain his or her parental rights.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.