Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 172 - PROCEEDINGS AFTER COMMITMENT AND BEFORE INDICTMENT

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.155

Degree of evidence to warrant indictment; objection

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 172.155  Degree of evidence to warrant indictment; objection.

      1.  The grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before them, taken together, establishes probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant has committed it.

      2.  The defendant may object to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the indictment only by application for a writ of habeas corpus.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1409; A 1979, 331)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1968–2025 · leading case: Azbill v. State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Azbill v. State (1968) nev · cites it 12× “The controlling Nevada statute is NRS 172.155 [1] , which defines the degree of the *1020 evidence necessary to warrant an indictment.”
Kirksey v. State (1996) nev · cites it 2× “Kirksey further contends that such a motion would have been effective because the medical examiner “did not categorically state” that Foxx’s death “could only have been caused by the trauma.” We disagree with both contentions.”
Sheriff v. Burcham (2008) nev · cites it 2× “" [38] NRS 172.155(1) requires that the grand jury, prior to indicting the accused, find probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the person charged committed the crime.”
Seim v. State (1979) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 172.155. The defendant can object to the sufficiency of the evidence by application for writ of habeas corpus.”
Franklin v. State (1973) nev · cites it 4× “135(1) and NRS 172.155. Cf. State v. Eddington, 83 Nev.”
Schuster v. Eighth Judicial District Court (2007) nev “” NRS 172.155(1) explains that a “grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before [it], taken together, establishes probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant has committed it.”
Frutiger v. State (1995) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 172.155. On appeal, Frutiger first argues that there was insufficient evidence before the grand jury to prove the corpus delicti.”
Sheriff, Clark County v. Hicks (1973) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 172.155. 5 The district judge, after a hearing on the habeas petition, found that there was a lack of probable cause to sustain the murder and attempt murder counts, and the court dismissed *81 those counts.”
Phillips v. Sheriff (1977) nev · cites it 2× “Additionally, appellant has proffered the contention that the requirements of NRS 172.155(1 ) 2 were not met and that the then chief trial judge exceeded his authority in the impanelment of the grand jury.”
Sheriff, Washoe County v. Middleton (1996) nev “NRS 172.155; Frutiger, 111 Nev. at 1389 , 907 P.”
Biglieri v. WASHOE CTY. GRAND JURY REPORT, ETC. (1979) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 172.155(1). If, on the other hand, the grand jury was not satisfied with the accuracy of its information concerning appellant's conduct, then it could report only in general terms on matters pertaining to the public welfare.”
McKinney v. Sheriff, Clark County (1977) nev “NRS 172.155. Kinsey v. Sheriff, 87 Nev. 361 , 487 P.”
Show all 40 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.155(1) — 13 cases
Sheriff v. Burcham (2008) nev “" [38] NRS 172.155(1) requires that the grand jury, prior to indicting the accused, find probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the person charged committed the crime.”
Schuster v. Eighth Judicial District Court (2007) nev “” NRS 172.155(1) explains that a “grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before [it], taken together, establishes probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant has committed it.”
Franklin v. State (1973) nev “135(1) and NRS 172.155. Cf. State v. Eddington, 83 Nev.”
Biglieri v. WASHOE CTY. GRAND JURY REPORT, ETC. (1979) nev “NRS 172.155(1). If, on the other hand, the grand jury was not satisfied with the accuracy of its information concerning appellant's conduct, then it could report only in general terms on matters pertaining to the public welfare.”
Sheriff v. Dhadda (1999) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.155(2) — 4 cases
Azbill v. State (1968) nev “The controlling Nevada statute is NRS 172.155 [1] , which defines the degree of the *1020 evidence necessary to warrant an indictment.”
Grego v. SHERIFF, CLARK CTY. (1978) nev
Wills v. State (1977) nev
DAYANI (FAHD) v. DIST. CT. (STATE) (2024) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.155(a) — 1 case
Camacho v. Garrett (2025) nvd
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.