Tag: NRS 200.481

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.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for November 21, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for November 21, 2018

VICKERS (TRACEY) VS. DIRECTOR

  • Is an offender who is willing and able to work but who has not been assigned a job by the Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) entitled to labor credits pursuant to NRS 209.4465(2).
  • Does the change in the ability to apply credits to minimum sentences brought about by the 2007 amendments to NRS 209.4465 violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States and Nevada Constitutions.

STARR (BRANDON) VS. STATE

  • When is a criminal defendant entitled to an inverse flight instruction.

MCGOWEN VS. DIST. CT. (CRYSTAL)

  • Can a plaintiff’s attorney or the employee of a plaintiff’s attorney serve a summons and complaint on a defendant.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for August 2, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for August 2, 2018

COLES (BRENT) VS. BISBEE

  • Does the Parole Board’s use of the Static-99R recidivism risk assessment comply with the relevant statutory provisions governing parole review for prisoners convicted of sexual offenses.

SHORES VS. GLOBAL EXPERIENCE SPECIALISTS, INC.

  • Must a noncompete agreement that imposes a nationwide restriction be limited to the geographical areas in which an employer has particular business interests.

N. NEVADA HOMES, LLC VS. GL CONSTR., INC.

  • What is the proper method of determining the prevailing party when faced with both a settlement and a damages recovery.

IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO S.L., N.R.B., H.R.B., W.C.B. C/W 71889

  • Does the termination of parental rights bases on the parents’ refusal to admit to abuse violate their Fifth Amendment rights.

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC VS. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON (NRAP 5)

  • Does NRS 116.31168(1)’s incorporation of NRS 107.090 require a homeowner’s association to provide notices of default and/or sale to persons or entities holding a subordinate interest even when such persons or entities did not request notice, prior to the amendment that took effect on October 1, 2015.

GRANADA-RUIZ (GAMBINO) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)

  • When does double jeopardy prohibit a retrial.

CLARK CTY. VS. HQ METRO, LLC

  • Does an order for immediate occupancy permitting a party to occupy a permanent easement vest a right to compensation.

NEVADA RECYCLING AND SALVAGE, LTD VS. RENO DISPOSAL CO., INC.

  • Were the appellants injured in their business and therefore have standing to assert their claim under the Nevada Unfair Trade Practice Act (UTPA).

HUBBARD (CORY) VS. STATE

  • Must the defense place intent or absence of mistake at issue before the State can seek admission of prior act evidence.

RIPPO (MICHAEL) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-PC)

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 19, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 19, 2018

LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC

  • Did the district court abuse its discretion under the Nevada Supreme Court Rule Part IX-B(B) when its written order summarily denied a civil defendant’s request to testify at trial using audiovisual equipment.
  • What standard must a court use to determine the admissibility of intoxication as a defense to a contract claim.

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (KEPHART (JOHN))

  • What determines felony enhancement for domestic battery under NRS 200.485.

GLOVER-ARMONT V. CARGILE

  • Does the discretionary-act immunity doctrine apply to an action arising from a vehicular accident involving a police officer responding to an emergency.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for May 3, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for May 3, 2018

DOLORES VS. STATE, DEP’T OF EMPLOYMENT SEC. DIV.

  • Is submitting a resignation when faced with a resign-or-be-fired option a voluntary resignation under NRS 612.380, thereby disqualifying an individual from unemployment benefits.

LAS VEGAS DEV. GRP., LLC VS. BLAHA

  • Do the time limitations in NRS 107.080(5)-(6) (2010) bar an action challenging an NRS Chapter 107 nonjudicial foreclosure where it is alleged that the deed of trust had been extinguished before the sale.

COTTER, JR. VS. DIST. CT. (COTTER)

  • Do documents disclosed to third parties constitute waiver of the work-product privilege.

MEI-GSR HOLDINGS, LLC VS. PEPPERMILL CASINOS, INC.

  • Does NRS 600A.030, Nevada’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act (NTSA), preclude a defendant from demonstrating that certain information is readily ascertainable and not a trade secret even though the defendant acquired the information through improper means.

FITZGERALD VS. MOBILE BILLBOARDS, LLC

  • Were allegedly defamatory statements made by an employer regarding an employee’s alleged abuse of the workers’ compensation program to obtain prescription pain medication, a violation of NRS 616D.300, absolutely privileged.

IN RE: MATTER OF E.R. C/W 73198

  • Does a familial placement preference survive the termination of parental rights.

COLEMAN (SOLOMON) VS. STATE

  • Does NRS 200.604 prohibit a person from copying, without permission, a consensually recorded video depicting sexual acts.

MORGAN (JOHN) VS. STATE

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.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 7, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 7, 2017

MULLNER (TROY) VS. STATE

  • Can a court consider felony convictions originating from juvenile offenses in habitual criminal sentencing.

IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO T.L.

  • When does a parent lack standing to challenge a court’s placement decision following the termination of his or her parental rights.

AGWARA VS. STATE BAR OF NEVADA

  • Can an attorney assert his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to quash subpoenas issued by the State Bar that seek production of client accounting records and tax records.

NEVILLE, JR. VS. DIST. CT. (TERRIBLE HERBST, INC.)

  • Does NRS Chapter 608 provide a private right of action for unpaid wages.

ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY)

  • Is illegally obtained evidence admissible in a child custody proceeding.

DOE VS. STATE, LEGISLATURE OF THE 77TH SESSION

  • Does Nevada’s medical marijuana registry violate the Due Process, Equal Protection, or Self-Incrimination Clauses of the United States or Nevada Constitutions.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Can a defendant be prosecuted twice for the same offense if he or she fails to comply with the terms of a plea agreement?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Plea Agreement

Sweat (Lonnie) vs. Dist. Ct. (State) (Nev. Supreme Ct. – Oct. 5, 2017)

The Double Jeopardy Clause protects a defendant from multiple prosecutions for the same offense. This opinion addresses whether a defendant’s failure to comply with the terms of a plea agreement with the State constitutes a waiver of that protection.

On May 9, 2016, the State charged Sweat by way of criminal complaint with battery constituting domestic violence, a category C felony. In Nevada, battery constituting domestic violence is a felony if the defendant has two or more prior convictions for domestic violence within seven years. Because Sweat had priors in 2010 and 2011, the State opted to proceed as a felony. Pursuant to negotiations with the State of Nevada, Sweat agreed to plead guilty in justice court to one count of battery constituting domestic violence, a misdemeanor, and in district court to one count of battery constituting substantial bodily harm, a felony. In exchange for his pleas, the State agreed to drop the charge of battery constituting domestic violence as a felony. Per the agreement, Sweat pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor battery constituting domestic violence and was immediately sentenced to time served. Sweat also waived his right to a preliminary hearing and was bound over to district court for entry of plea on the felony count of battery causing substantial bodily harm.

Continue reading “Can a defendant be prosecuted twice for the same offense if he or she fails to comply with the terms of a plea agreement?” →

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.