6 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Griffin v. Stategreen2 sentences2025Accordingly, both challenge the computation of time served pursuant to a judgment of conviction, and a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus “[i]s the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction.” NRS 34.724(2)(c); see also Griffin v. State, 122 Nev. 737, 742-43 , 137 P.3d 1165, 1168-69 (2006) (interpreting the language of NRS 34.724(2)(c) as logically referring to “credit earned after a petitioner has begun to serve the sentence specified in the judgment of conviction’), In 2 2025Accordingly, both challenge the computation of time served pursuant to a judgment of conviction, and a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus “[i]s the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction.” NRS 34.724(2)(c); see also Griffin v. State, 122 Nev. 737, 742-43 , 137 P.3d 1165, 1168-69 (2006) (interpreting the language of NRS 34.724(2)(c) as logically referring to “credit earned after a petitioner has begun to serve the sentence specified in the judgment of conviction’), In 2 | 2 | 2 |
Pan v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clarkgreen2 sentences2022"A postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus is 'the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction."' Williams v. State, De13't of Corr., 133 Nev. 594 , 596, 402 P.3d 1260 , 1262 (2017) (quoting NRS 34.724(2)(c)); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224 , 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). 2021Nev., Depit of Corr., 133 Nev. 594, 596, 402 P.3d 1260, 1262 (2017) quoting NRS 34.724(2)(c); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). | 2 | 2 |
Pan v. Dist. Ct.green2 sentences2022"A postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus is 'the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction."' Williams v. State, De13't of Corr., 133 Nev. 594 , 596, 402 P.3d 1260 , 1262 (2017) (quoting NRS 34.724(2)(c)); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224 , 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). 2021Nev., Depit of Corr., 133 Nev. 594, 596, 402 P.3d 1260, 1262 (2017) quoting NRS 34.724(2)(c); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). | 2 | 2 |
Five Star Capital Corp. v. Rubygreen2 sentences2014Thus, respondents were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on that claim.' Second, the district court correctly determined that appellant's claim regarding his prison account was subject to claim preclusion as appellant had raised the same allegations in a justice court action. 2 Claim preclusion applies when (1) "the parties or their privies are the same," (2) there is a valid final judgment, and (3) the subsequent action involves "the same claims or any part of them that were or could have been brought in the first case." Five Star Capital Corp. v. Ruby, 124 Nev. 1048, 1054 , 194 P.3d 70 2014Thus, respondents were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on that claim.' Second, the district court correctly determined that appellant's claim regarding his prison account was subject to claim preclusion as appellant had raised the same allegations in a justice court action. 2 Claim preclusion applies when (1) "the parties or their privies are the same," (2) there is a valid final judgment, and (3) the subsequent action involves "the same claims or any part of them that were or could have been brought in the first case." Five Star Capital Corp. v. Ruby, 124 Nev. 1048, 1054 , 194 P.3d 70 | 1 | 1 |
Narvis G. Nonnette v. Larry Small R. Schelke E. Castro D. Johnson M.A. Corbin J. Builtmangreen1 sentence2014NRS 34.724(2)(c) (providing that a petition for habeas corpus "[i]s the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction"); see Nonnette v. Small, 316 F.3d 872, 875 (9th Cir. 2002) (recognizing that an inmate seeking to challenge the denial of credits to reduce his sentence "must proceed in habeas corpus"). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pangallo v. State
green
2 sentences2006NRS 34.724(2)(c) provides that a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus “[i]s the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that he has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction.” 112 Nev. at 1536 , 930 P.2d at 102 . 2006NRS 34.724(2)(c) provides that a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus “[i]s the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that he has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction.” 112 Nev. at 1536 , 930 P.2d at 102 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.