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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.235

Who may be present when grand jury is in session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 172.235  Who may be present when grand jury is in session.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, the following persons may be present while the grand jury is in session:

      (a) The district attorney;

      (b) A witness who is testifying;

      (c) An attorney who is accompanying a witness pursuant to NRS 172.239;

      (d) Any interpreter who is needed;

      (e) The certified court reporter who is taking stenographic notes of the proceeding;

      (f) Any person who is engaged by the grand jury pursuant to NRS 172.205; and

      (g) Any other person requested by the grand jury to be present.

      2.  No person other than the jurors may be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1410; A 1985, 555; 1993, 1412)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2024 · leading case: Mulder v. State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mulder v. State (2000) nev · cites it 2× “For the first time on appeal, Mulder challenges the indictment, contending that the officers’ presence intimidated Van Heusen while she testified against Mulder.”
Seim v. State (1979) nev · cites it 2× “Until an indictment is issued, a shroud of secrecy keeps the proceedings confidential, with logical statutory exceptions (NRS 172.235, 172.245), thereby protecting an accused from unfounded accusations.”
Franklin v. State (1973) nev · cites it 2× “205; NRS 172.235; Turpin v. Sheriff, 87 Nev. 236 , 484 P.”
Rugamas v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark (2013) nev “See NRS 172.235; NRS 172.239. Thus, whereas NRS 51.”
Turpin v. Sheriff, Clark County (1971) nev · cites it 2× “The transcript of the grand jury proceedings reveals the presence of a secretary from the district attorney’s office, which the appellant charges is in violation of NRS 172.235. 5 However, the minutes of the grand jury proceedings, which are a part of the record on this appeal,…”
CHASING HORSE (NATHAN) v. DIST. CT. (STATE) (2024) nev “See NRS 172.235(1)(a). But this privilege comes with responsibilities.”
Constancio v. Sheriff (1978) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 172.235. 1 Affirmed. NRS 172.235 provides: “The district attorney, the witness under examination, interpreters when needed, a stenographer for the purpose of taking the evidence, any person engaged by the grand jury pursuant to NRS 172.”
Rugamas v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (2013) nev “See NRS 172.235; NRS 172.239. Thus, whereas NRS 51.”
Griffo (Llewell) v. State (2015) nev “See SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A NRS 172.235(2) (stating only grand "jurors may be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting").”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.235(1) — 1 case
Mulder v. State (2000) nev “For the first time on appeal, Mulder challenges the indictment, contending that the officers’ presence intimidated Van Heusen while she testified against Mulder.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.235(1)(a) — 1 case
CHASING HORSE (NATHAN) v. DIST. CT. (STATE) (2024) nev “See NRS 172.235(1)(a). But this privilege comes with responsibilities.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.235(1)(g) — 1 case
Mulder v. State (2000) nev “For the first time on appeal, Mulder challenges the indictment, contending that the officers’ presence intimidated Van Heusen while she testified against Mulder.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 172.235(2) — 1 case
Griffo (Llewell) v. State (2015) nev “See SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A NRS 172.235(2) (stating only grand "jurors may be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting").”
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.