10 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 2018–2024 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jeremias v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Jeremias v. State, 134 Nev. 46 , 50, 412 P.3d 43, 48 (2018) ("The failure to preserve an error, even an error that has been deemed structural, forfeits the right to assert it on appeal."). 2023See deremias v. State, 134 Nev. 46 , 412 P.3d 43 (201.8) ("The failure to preserve an error . . .,forfeits the right to assert it on appeal."). | 7 | 7 |
United States v. Olanogreen2 sentences2022"The failure to preserve an error, even an error that has been deemed structural, forfeits the right to assert it on appeal." Jerernias v. State, 134 Nev. 46 , 50, 412 P.3d 43, 48 (2018); see also United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731 (1993) (No procedural principle is more familiar to this Court than that a constitutional right, or a right of any other sort, may be forfeited in criminal as well as civil cases by the failure to make timely assertion of the right. . . ." (internal quotation marks omitted)). 2022"The failure to preserve an error, even an error that has been deemed structural, forfeits the right to assert it on appeal." Jerernias v. State, 134 Nev. 46 , 50, 412 P.3d 43, 48 (2018); see also United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731 (1993) (No procedural principle is more familiar to this Court than that a constitutional right, or a right of any other sort, may be forfeited in criminal as well as civil cases by the failure to make timely assertion of the right. . . ." (internal quotation marks omitted)). | 4 | 5 |
Randolph v. Stategreen2 sentences2024While Morrison challenges the State's reference to the interview during its closing argument, "Nile State is free to comment on testimony, to express its views on what the evidence shows, and to ask the jury to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence." Randolph v. State, 117 Nev. 970, 984 , 36 P.3d 424, 433 (2001). 2024While Morrison challenges the State's reference to the interview during its closing argument, "Nile State is free to comment on testimony, to express its views on what the evidence shows, and to ask the jury to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence." Randolph v. State, 117 Nev. 970, 984 , 36 P.3d 424, 433 (2001). | 1 | 1 |
Mazzan v. Warden, Ely State Prisongreen2 sentences2022See Jeremias, 134 Nev. at 50, 412 P.3d at 48 ("The failure to preserve an error, even an error that has been deemed structural, forfeits the right to assert it on appear); Mazzan v. Warden, 116 Nev. 48, 75, 993 P.2d 25, 42 (2000) ("Contentions unsupported by specific argument or authority should be summarily rejected on appeal."). 2022See Jeremias, 134 Nev. at 50, 412 P.3d at 48 ("The failure to preserve an error, even an error that has been deemed structural, forfeits the right to assert it on appear); Mazzan v. Warden, 116 Nev. 48 , 75, 993 P.2d 25, 42 (2000) ("Contentions unsupported by specific argument or authority should be summarily rejected on appeal."). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.