6 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 1964–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hobbs v. Stategreen2 sentences2024See Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr., 133 Nev. 594 , 596, 402 P.3d 1260 , 1262 (2017) ("This court 'avoid[s] statutory interpretation that renders language meaningless or superfluous.'" (quoting Hobbs v. State, 127 Nev. 234, 237 , 251 P.3d 177, 179 (2011))). 2024See Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr., 133 Nev. 594 , 596, 402 P.3d 1260 , 1262 (2017) ("This court 'avoid[s] statutory interpretation that renders language meaningless or superfluous.'" (quoting Hobbs v. State, 127 Nev. 234, 237 , 251 P.3d 177, 179 (2011))). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cataniogreen2 sentences2020State v. Catanio, 120 Nev. 1030, 1036, 102 P.3d 588, 592 (2004) 'To the extent that Moore challenges Jury Instruction 14 as a general- intent instruction, his argument lacks merit. 2020State v. Catanio, 120 Nev. 1030, 1036, 102 P.3d 588, 592 (2004) 'To the extent that Moore challenges Jury Instruction 14 as a general- intent instruction, his argument lacks merit. | 1 | 1 |
Childers v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See Childers v. State, 100 Nev. 280, 282-83 , 680 P.2d 598, 599 (1984). 2013See Childers v. State, 100 Nev. 280, 282-83 , 680 P.2d 598, 599 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Sheriff v. Burdggreen2 sentences2012However, the State contends that this court should read NRS 293.805 to incorporate a general intent requirement pursuant to NRS 193.190, which provides that “[i]n every crime or public offense there must exist a union, or joint operation of act and intention, or criminal negligence.” In Sheriff v. Burdg, 118 Nev. 853, 858 , 59 P.3d 484, 487 (2002), we held that NRS 193.190 did not alleviate the lack of an intent element in a statute that prohibited possessing a majority of ingredients required to make a controlled substance other than marijuana because it was not clear where the court would im 2012However, the State contends that this court should read NRS 293.805 to incorporate a general intent requirement pursuant to NRS 193.190, which provides that “[i]n every crime or public offense there must exist a union, or joint operation of act and intention, or criminal negligence.” In Sheriff v. Burdg, 118 Nev. 853, 858 , 59 P.3d 484, 487 (2002), we held that NRS 193.190 did not alleviate the lack of an intent element in a statute that prohibited possessing a majority of ingredients required to make a controlled substance other than marijuana because it was not clear where the court would im | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hillgreen1 sentence2011See, e.g., People v. Hill, 163 Cal. Rptr. 99, 108 (Ct. App. 1980) (reversing pandering conviction because the jury was not instructed on specific intent). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lewis
green
2 sentences1964The crime of manslaughter does not require the specific intent to kill (NRS 200.050, voluntary manslaughter; NRS 200.070, involuntary manslaughter; State v. Lewis, 59 Nev. 262 , 91 P.2d 820 , involuntary manslaughter) ; and the general intent instruction quoted in the footnote was not inappropriate for that crime. 1964The crime of manslaughter does not require the specific intent to kill (NRS 200.050, voluntary manslaughter; NRS 200.070, involuntary manslaughter; State v. Lewis, 59 Nev. 262 , 91 P.2d 820 , involuntary manslaughter) ; and the general intent instruction quoted in the footnote was not inappropriate for that crime. | 1 | 1964–1964 |
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.