Nev. Rev. Stat. § 171.1965

Discovery by defendant before preliminary examination; material subject to discovery; effect of failure to permit discovery

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 171.1965 Discovery by defendant before preliminary examination; material subject to discovery; effect of failure to permit discovery.

1. At the time a person is brought before a magistrate pursuant to NRS 171.178, or as soon as practicable thereafter, but not less than 5 judicial days before a preliminary examination, the prosecuting attorney shall provide a defendant charged with a felony or a gross misdemeanor with copies of any:

(a) Written or recorded statements or confessions made by the defendant, or any written or recorded statements made by a witness or witnesses, or any reports of statements or confessions, or copies thereof, within the possession or custody of the prosecuting attorney;

(b) Results or reports of physical or mental examinations, scientific tests or scientific experiments made in connection with the particular case, or copies thereof, within the possession or custody of the prosecuting attorney; and

(c) Books, papers, documents or tangible objects that the prosecuting attorney intends to introduce in evidence during the case in chief of the State, or copies thereof, within the possession or custody of the prosecuting attorney.

2. The defendant is not entitled, pursuant to the provisions of this section, to the discovery or inspection of:

(a) An internal report, document or memorandum that is prepared by or on behalf of the prosecuting attorney in connection with the investigation or prosecution of the case.

(b) A statement, report, book, paper, document, tangible object or any other type of item or information that is privileged or protected from disclosure or inspection pursuant to the Constitution or laws of this State or the Constitution of the United States.

3. The provisions of this section are not intended to affect any obligation placed upon the prosecuting attorney by the Constitution of this State or the Constitution of the United States to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defendant.

4. The magistrate shall not postpone a preliminary examination at the request of a party based solely on the failure of the prosecuting attorney to permit the defendant to inspect, copy or photograph material as required in this section, unless the court finds that the defendant has been prejudiced by such failure.

(Added to NRS by 1997, 2364; A 2009, 486)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2006–2023 · leading case: Chavez v. State

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Chavez v. State (2009) nev “”); NRS 171.1965(1) (stating that, before the preliminary hearing, the defendant is entitled to written or recorded statements by the defendant or a witness, reports, and other evidence within the prosecutor’s custody or possession).”

State v. Sargent (2006) nev “2d at 402 , superseded in part by NRS 171.1965 (making certain materials subject to discovery by the defendant before the preliminary hearing).”

Carr (Stephen) v. State (2018) nev · cites it 4× “Appellant Stephen Carr contends (1) his misdemeanor trial and felony preliminary hearing were improperly joined into a single proceeding, (2) the State failed to timely disclose exculpatory reports in violation of NRS 171.1965 and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.”

Carr v. State (2018) nev · cites it 4× “Appellant Stephen Carr contends (1) his misdemeanor trial and felony preliminary hearing were improperly joined into a single proceeding, (2) the State failed to timely disclose exculpatory reports in violation of NRS 171.1965 and Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.”

Hooker (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (2014) nev · cites it 4× “The district court heard argument, found that petitioner "did not specifically identify the statute NRS 171.1965 for the magistrate so the magistrate could have taken the options that are provided in that statute when there is a late identification of discovery," and denied the…”

Brewer v. Reubart (2023) nvd · cites it 2× “) 13 NRS § 171.1965 requires a Nevada prosecutor to produce to the defense certain 14 discovery that is “within the possession or custody of the prosecuting attorney” at least 15 five days prior to a preliminary hearing.”

Brewer v. Reubart (2023) nvd · cites it 2× “) 11 NRS § 171.1965 requires a Nevada prosecutor to produce to the defense certain 12 discovery that is “within the possession or custody of the prosecuting attorney” at least 13 five days prior to a preliminary hearing.”

Vanhorn (Richard) v. State (2015) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 171.1965(1)(a) requires disclosure, at least five days before a preliminary examination, of "written or recorded statements made by a witness or witnesses, or any reports of statements or confessions, or copies thereof, within the possession or custody of the prosecuting…”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 171.1965(1) — 2 cases

Hooker (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (2014) nev “The district court heard argument, found that petitioner "did not specifically identify the statute NRS 171.1965 for the magistrate so the magistrate could have taken the options that are provided in that statute when there is a late identification of discovery," and denied the…”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 171.1965(1)(a) — 3 cases

Carr (Stephen) v. State (2018) nev “Appellant Stephen Carr contends (1) his misdemeanor trial and felony preliminary hearing were improperly joined into a single proceeding, (2) the State failed to timely disclose exculpatory reports in violation of NRS 171.1965 and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.”

Carr v. State (2018) nev “Appellant Stephen Carr contends (1) his misdemeanor trial and felony preliminary hearing were improperly joined into a single proceeding, (2) the State failed to timely disclose exculpatory reports in violation of NRS 171.1965 and Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.”

Vanhorn (Richard) v. State (2015) nev “NRS 171.1965(1)(a) requires disclosure, at least five days before a preliminary examination, of "written or recorded statements made by a witness or witnesses, or any reports of statements or confessions, or copies thereof, within the possession or custody of the prosecuting…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.