Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
26 Nevada opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2022 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Nevada courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Nunnery v. Stategreen2 sentences2019We previously rejected the second argument that the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard does not apply to the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. 749 , 772, 263 P.3d 235 , 250-51 (2011). 2019We previously rejected the second argument that the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard does not apply to the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. 749 , 772, 263 P.3d 235 , 250-51 (2011). | 12 | 13 |
Kansas v. Kansasgreen2 sentences2018Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. 749, 775-76 , 263 P.3d 235, 253 (2011); accord Kansas v. Carr, U .S. , 136 S. Ct. 633, 642 (2016) (concluding that the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances is not subject to the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard). 2017Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. 749, 775-76 , 263 P.3d 235, 253 (2011); accord Kansas v. Carr, U.S. , 136 S. Ct. 633, 642 (2016) (concluding that the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances is not subject to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard). | 4 | 4 |
Mark Leonard v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). 2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). | 3 | 3 |
Timothy Nelson Evans v. State of Mississippigreen2 sentences2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). 2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). | 3 | 3 |
People v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). 2018Accord People v. Jones, 398 P.3d 529, 554 (Cal. 2017); Leonard v. State, 73 N.E.3d 155, 169 (Ind. 2017); Evans v. State, 226 So. 3d 1, 39 (Miss. 2017). | 3 | 3 |
McConnell v. Stategreen2 sentences2016But even if postconviction counsel could have demonstrated that appellate counsel's performance was deficient, our decisions in McConnell v. State, 125 Nev. 243, 254 , 212 P.3d 307, 314-15 (2009), which concluded that nothing in the relevant statutory language imposed a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard on the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev., Adv. 2016But even if postconviction counsel could have demonstrated that appellate counsel's performance was deficient, our decisions in McConnell v. State, 125 Nev. 243, 254 , 212 P.3d 307, 314-15 (2009), which concluded that nothing in the relevant statutory language imposed a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard on the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev., Adv. | 2 | 2 |
DuFrane v. Sheriff, Washoe Countygreen2 sentences2021Thus, "[Ole preliminary hearing is not a trial and the issue of the defendant's guilt or innocence is SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 1947A 411461D not a matter before the court." Las Vegas Twp., 112 Nev. at 806 , 919 P.2d at 402 ; see also DuFrane v. Sheriff, 88 Nev. 52, 54 , 495 P.2d 611, 613 (1972) (recognizing the lower standard of proof needed to establish probable cause at a preliminary hearing versus the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard that must be met at trial). 2021Thus, "[Ole preliminary hearing is not a trial and the issue of the defendant's guilt or innocence is SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 1947A 411461D not a matter before the court." Las Vegas Twp., 112 Nev. at 806 , 919 P.2d at 402 ; see also DuFrane v. Sheriff, 88 Nev. 52, 54 , 495 P.2d 611, 613 (1972) (recognizing the lower standard of proof needed to establish probable cause at a preliminary hearing versus the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard that must be met at trial). | 2 | 2 |
Johnson v. Statered2 sentences2016Jury instructions Hover argues that: (1) the instruction concerning weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances did not conform to the beyond- a-reasonable-doubt standard of Johnson v. State, 118 Nev. 787, 802 , 59 P.3d 450, 460 (2002); the "moral culpability" language in the instruction defining mitigating circumstances was not broad enough to define mitigating circumstances; and the instructions failed to define "felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person of another." Hover did not object to the instructions below and we conclude that the district court did not plainl 2016Jury instructions Hover argues that: (1) the instruction concerning weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances did not conform to the beyond- a-reasonable-doubt standard of Johnson v. State, 118 Nev. 787, 802 , 59 P.3d 450, 460 (2002); the "moral culpability" language in the instruction defining mitigating circumstances was not broad enough to define mitigating circumstances; and the instructions failed to define "felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person of another." Hover did not object to the instructions below and we conclude that the district court did not plainl | 1 | 2 |
Gaxiola v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Gaxiola v. State, 121 Nev. 638, 648-50 , 119 P.3d 1225, 1232-33 (2005).5 We further conclude that the instruction neither invited the jury to violate its obligation to consider other evidence nor involved the district court commenting on the facts of the case as the plain language of the instruction was devoid of case facts and reiterated the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard the jury was obligated to follow. 2019Gaxiola v. State, 121 Nev. 638, 648-50 , 119 P.3d 1225, 1232-33 (2005).5 We further conclude that the instruction neither invited the jury to violate its obligation to consider other evidence nor involved the district court commenting on the facts of the case as the plain language of the instruction was devoid of case facts and reiterated the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard the jury was obligated to follow. | 1 | 1 |
Hymon v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See NRS 3.230 (prohibiting statements regarding factual matters by district judges); Hymon, 121 Nev. at 211 , 111 P.3d at 1100 (presuming the jury follows its instructions). 2019See NRS 3.230 (prohibiting statements regarding factual matters by district judges); Hymon, 121 Nev. at 211 , 111 P.3d at 1100 (presuming the jury follows its instructions). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gomesgreen2 sentences2018State v. Gomes, 112 Nev. 1473, 1481 , 930 P.2d 701, 706 (1996). 2018State v. Gomes, 112 Nev. 1473, 1481 , 930 P.2d 701, 706 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
Browning v. Stategreen2 sentences2016See Browning v. State, 124 Nev. 517, 526 , 188 P.3d 60, 67 (2008) ("The focus of a capital penalty hearing is not the defendant's guilt, but rather his character, record, and the circumstances of the offense."). 2016See Browning v. State, 124 Nev. 517, 526 , 188 P.3d 60, 67 (2008) ("The focus of a capital penalty hearing is not the defendant's guilt, but rather his character, record, and the circumstances of the offense."). | 1 | 1 |
Valdez v. Stategreen1 sentence2016See Valdez, 129 Nev. at 1190 , 196 P.3d at 477 (reviewing unobjected-to error for plain error affecting substantial rights). | 1 | 1 |
Leonard v. Stategreen2 sentences2014Instructions Blake contends that post-conviction counsel was ineffective for not raising a claim that trial and appellate counsel should have challenged several jury instructions, including (1) reasonable doubt, (2) weighing of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 16 (0) 1047A aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and (3) "equal and exact justice." Post-conviction counsel's omission of these trial- and appellate- counsel claims was not objectively unreasonable because the instructions were correct statements of law, see NRS 175.211(1); Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. „ 263 P.3d 235, 250-51 (2011) (concludin 2014Instructions Blake contends that post-conviction counsel was ineffective for not raising a claim that trial and appellate counsel should have challenged several jury instructions, including (1) reasonable doubt, (2) weighing of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 16 (0) 1047A aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and (3) "equal and exact justice." Post-conviction counsel's omission of these trial- and appellate- counsel claims was not objectively unreasonable because the instructions were correct statements of law, see NRS 175.211(1); Nunnery v. State, 127 Nev. „ 263 P.3d 235, 250-51 (2011) (concludin | 1 | 1 |
DePasquale v. Stategreen2 sentences2011See, e.g., DePasquale v. State, 106 Nev. 843, 852 , 803 P.2d 218, 223 (1990). 2011See, e.g., DePasquale v. State, 106 Nev. 843, 852 , 803 P.2d 218, 223 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
Jimenez v. Stategreen2 sentences2011Cf. Jimenez v. State, 112 Nev. 610, 624-25 , 918 P.2d 687, 695-96 (1996) (applying similar analysis to claim that trial court erred in failing to instruct jury that mitigating circumstances did not have to be found unanimously). 2011Cf. Jimenez v. State, 112 Nev. 610, 624-25 , 918 P.2d 687, 695-96 (1996) (applying similar analysis to claim that trial court erred in failing to instruct jury that mitigating circumstances did not have to be found unanimously). | 1 | 1 |
Robert Alton Harris v. R. Pulley, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentinred1 sentence1985U.S. ......, 105 S.Ct. 1372 (1985) we stated: “Since our procedure for weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances provides the sentencer with adequate information and guidance and the accused with sufficient guarantees that the penalty of death will not be imposed arbitrarily and capriciously, the challenged statute passes constitutional muster.” Lastly, as the Ninth Circuit Court stated in Harris v. Pulley, 692 F.2d 1189, 1195 (9th Cir. 1982), rev’d on other grounds, 465 U.S. 37 (1984): “The United States Supreme Court has never stated that a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard is requi | 1 | 1 |
Gagnon v. Scarpellired2 sentences1980Although the Supreme Court has not specifically addressed the applicable standard of proof in probation revocation hearings, its opinion in Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. at 789 -90 n. 12, 93 S.Ct. at 1763 n. 12, indicates that the Court believes that probation could be revoked on less than a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. 1980Although the Supreme Court has not specifically addressed the applicable standard of proof in probation revocation hearings, its opinion in Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. at 789 -90 n. 12, 93 S.Ct. at 1763 n. 12, indicates that the Court believes that probation could be revoked on less than a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sawyer v. Whitley
green
2 sentences2018Id. 2018Id. | 3 | 2018–2018 |
Apprendi v. New Jersey
green
2 sentences2015Weighing equation Burnside argues that the jurors were improperly instructed on the weighing of mitigating and aggravating circumstances because that determination is a finding of fact that is necessary to make death an available sentence and therefore that weighing is subject to the beyond-a- reasonable-doubt standard under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). 2015Weighing equation Burnside argues that the jurors were improperly instructed on the weighing of mitigating and aggravating circumstances because that determination is a finding of fact that is necessary to make death an available sentence and therefore that weighing is subject to the beyond-a- reasonable-doubt standard under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). | 3 | 2014–2015 |
Ring v. Arizona
green
2 sentences2015Weighing equation Burnside argues that the jurors were improperly instructed on the weighing of mitigating and aggravating circumstances because that determination is a finding of fact that is necessary to make death an available sentence and therefore that weighing is subject to the beyond-a- reasonable-doubt standard under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). 2015Weighing equation Burnside argues that the jurors were improperly instructed on the weighing of mitigating and aggravating circumstances because that determination is a finding of fact that is necessary to make death an available sentence and therefore that weighing is subject to the beyond-a- reasonable-doubt standard under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). | 3 | 2014–2015 |
State of Nevada v. Justice Court
green
2 sentences2021Thus, "[Ole preliminary hearing is not a trial and the issue of the defendant's guilt or innocence is SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 1947A 411461D not a matter before the court." Las Vegas Twp., 112 Nev. at 806 , 919 P.2d at 402 ; see also DuFrane v. Sheriff, 88 Nev. 52, 54 , 495 P.2d 611, 613 (1972) (recognizing the lower standard of proof needed to establish probable cause at a preliminary hearing versus the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard that must be met at trial). 2021Thus, "[Ole preliminary hearing is not a trial and the issue of the defendant's guilt or innocence is SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 1947A 411461D not a matter before the court." Las Vegas Twp., 112 Nev. at 806 , 919 P.2d at 402 ; see also DuFrane v. Sheriff, 88 Nev. 52, 54 , 495 P.2d 611, 613 (1972) (recognizing the lower standard of proof needed to establish probable cause at a preliminary hearing versus the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard that must be met at trial). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Hurst v. Florida
green
1 sentence2021Florida, 577 U.S. 92 (2016), provides good cause to excuse his procedural default as to the first claim in his petition—that the district court should have instructed the jury that the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances was subject to the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of proof. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Jeremias v. Nevada
green
2 sentences2019We recently rejected the first argument, Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. ----, ----, 412 P.3d 43 , 53, cert, denied, --- U.S. ----, 139 S. Ct. 415 , 202 L.Ed.2d 320 (2018), and in doing so, we reaffirmed our prior decisions that a defendant is death-eligible in Nevada once the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of first-degree murder and at least one statutory aggravating circumstance, Lisle v. State, 131 Nev. 356 , 365-66, 351 P.3d 725 , 732 (2015). 2019We recently rejected the first argument, Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. ----, ----, 412 P.3d 43 , 53, cert, denied, --- U.S. ----, 139 S. Ct. 415 , 202 L.Ed.2d 320 (2018), and in doing so, we reaffirmed our prior decisions that a defendant is death-eligible in Nevada once the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of first-degree murder and at least one statutory aggravating circumstance, Lisle v. State, 131 Nev. 356 , 365-66, 351 P.3d 725 , 732 (2015). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Dettloff v. State
green
2 sentences2019Dettloff v. State, 120 Nev. 588 , 596 & n.18, 97 P.3d 586 , 591 & n.18 (2004). 2019Dettloff v. State, 120 Nev. 588 , 596 & n.18, 97 P.3d 586 , 591 & n.18 (2004). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Jeremias v. State
green
1 sentence2019We recently rejected the first argument, Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. ----, ----, 412 P.3d 43 , 53, cert, denied, --- U.S. ----, 139 S. Ct. 415 , 202 L.Ed.2d 320 (2018), and in doing so, we reaffirmed our prior decisions that a defendant is death-eligible in Nevada once the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of first-degree murder and at least one statutory aggravating circumstance, Lisle v. State, 131 Nev. 356 , 365-66, 351 P.3d 725 , 732 (2015). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Bollinger v. State
green
2 sentences2014State, 111 Nev. 1110 , 1115 & n.2, 901 P.2d 671 , 674 & n.2 (1995) (holding that language in reasonable doubt instruction is not unconstitutional where the jury received additional instruction on the State's burden of proof and the presumption of innocence), and therefore the omitted trial- and appellate-counsel claims would have had no merit. 2014State, 111 Nev. 1110 , 1115 & n.2, 901 P.2d 671 , 674 & n.2 (1995) (holding that language in reasonable doubt instruction is not unconstitutional where the jury received additional instruction on the State's burden of proof and the presumption of innocence), and therefore the omitted trial- and appellate-counsel claims would have had no merit. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Pulley v. Harris
green
1 sentence1985U.S. ......, 105 S.Ct. 1372 (1985) we stated: “Since our procedure for weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances provides the sentencer with adequate information and guidance and the accused with sufficient guarantees that the penalty of death will not be imposed arbitrarily and capriciously, the challenged statute passes constitutional muster.” Lastly, as the Ninth Circuit Court stated in Harris v. Pulley, 692 F.2d 1189, 1195 (9th Cir. 1982), rev’d on other grounds, 465 U.S. 37 (1984): “The United States Supreme Court has never stated that a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard is requi | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.