16 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2021 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cranford v. Smartgreen2 sentences2021Rather, it "contemplates a safeguard against egregious error by a [justice of the peace] in determining probable cause, not a device to be used by a prosecutor to satisfy deficiencies in evidence at a preliminary examination, through affidavit." Cranford v. Smart, 92 Nev. 89, 91 , 545 P.2d 1162, 1163 (1976). 2021Rather, it "contemplates a safeguard against egregious error by a [justice of the peace] in determining probable cause, not a device to be used by a prosecutor to satisfy deficiencies in evidence at a preliminary examination, through affidavit." Cranford v. Smart, 92 Nev. 89, 91 , 545 P.2d 1162, 1163 (1976). | 15 | 15 |
Feole v. Stategreen2 sentences2015In Feole v. State, the court relied on its usage of "egregious error" in Cranford to conclude a justice court did not commit egregious error when it discharged a defendant based on insufficient evidence to support a finding of probable cause to support the charges. 113 Nev. 628, 631, 939 P.2d 1061, 1063 (1997), overruled on other grounds by State v. Sixth Judicial Dist. 2015In Feole v. State, the court relied on its usage of "egregious error" in Cranford to conclude a justice court did not commit egregious error when it discharged a defendant based on insufficient evidence to support a finding of probable cause to support the charges. 113 Nev. 628, 631, 939 P.2d 1061, 1063 (1997), overruled on other grounds by State v. Sixth Judicial Dist. | 4 | 4 |
State v. Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. County of Humboldtgreen2 sentences2000NRS *938 173.035(2) is ‘“a safeguard against egregious error by a magistrate in determining probable cause, not a device to be used by a prosecutor to satisfy deficiencies in evidence at a preliminary examination, through affidavit.’ ” State of Nevada v. District Court, 114 Nev. 739, 741-42 , 964 P.2d 48, 49 (1998) (quoting Cranford v. Smart, 92 Nev. 89, 91 , 545 P.2d 1162, 1163 (1976)). 2000NRS *938 173.035(2) is ‘“a safeguard against egregious error by a magistrate in determining probable cause, not a device to be used by a prosecutor to satisfy deficiencies in evidence at a preliminary examination, through affidavit.’ ” State of Nevada v. District Court, 114 Nev. 739, 741-42 , 964 P.2d 48, 49 (1998) (quoting Cranford v. Smart, 92 Nev. 89, 91 , 545 P.2d 1162, 1163 (1976)). | 1 | 1 |
Lamb v. Lovelessgreen2 sentences1976See Lamb v. Loveless, 86 Nev. 286 , 468 P.2d 24 (1970). 1976See Lamb v. Loveless, 86 Nev. 286 , 468 P.2d 24 (1970). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Murphy v. State
green
2 sentences1998In Murphy , this court held that “[t]he State ha[d] failed to make a showing that Judge Terrell’s refusal to bind over Murphy for trial was an egregious error.” 110 Nev. at 198 , 871 P.2d at 918 . 1998In Murphy , this court held that “[t]he State ha[d] failed to make a showing that Judge Terrell’s refusal to bind over Murphy for trial was an egregious error.” 110 Nev. at 198 , 871 P.2d at 918 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.