Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 173 - INDICTMENT AND INFORMATION
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 173.045 (2026)

District attorney or Attorney General to be informant; endorsement of names of witnesses; affidavits

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 173.045  District attorney or Attorney General to be informant; endorsement of names of witnesses; affidavits.

      1.  All informations must be filed in the court having jurisdiction of the offenses specified therein, by the Attorney General when acting pursuant to a specific statute or by the district attorney of the proper county as informant, and his or her name must be subscribed thereto by him or her or by his or her deputy.

      2.  The district attorney or the Attorney General shall endorse thereon the names of such witnesses as are known at the time of filing the information. The district attorney or Attorney General shall not endorse the name of any witness whom he or she does not reasonably expect to call.

      3.  In all cases in which the defendant has not had or waived a preliminary examination there must be filed with the information the affidavit of some credible person verifying the information upon the personal knowledge of affiant that the offense was committed.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1412; A 1975, 655; 1989, 163; 1997, 2365)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1970–2015 · leading case: Redmen v. State, 828 P.2d 395 (Nev. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Redmen v. State, 828 P.2d 395 (Nev. 1992). · cites it 8× “NRS 173.045(2) requires the district attorney to endorse such witnesses as are known to him at the time of the filing of the information.”
Jones v. State, 937 P.2d 55 (Nev. 1997). · cites it 4× “The district court did not commit reversible error in permitting unendorsed witness Brian Wraxall to testify In a related issue, Jones claims that the State's failure to strictly comply with the provisions of NRS 173.045(2), [4] which requires endorsement of prosecution…”
Ryan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., in & for Cty. of Clark, 503 P.2d 842 (Nev. 1972). · cites it 6× “Neither does NRS 173.045, subsection 1, which provides that all informations shall be filed in the court having jurisdiction of the offense named, by the district attorney of the proper county as informant.”
Alward v. State, 912 P.2d 243 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 2× “Alward raises numerous contentions on appeal, including whether: (1) the State concealed its theory of the case, (2) the State violated NRS 173.045(2) by listing numerous witnesses, and only calling a few of those witnesses, (3) evidence pertaining to Alward's character was…”
Owens v. State, 620 P.2d 1236 (Nev. 1980). “NRS 173.045(2). However, a defendant’s right *883 to confront witnesses is not violated by the trial court’s refusal to disclose the address of a witness if disclosure could subject the witness to harassment, humiliation or danger.”
Barker v. State, 594 P.2d 719 (Nev. 1979). “The prosecutor did not learn of the testimony until the evening before the motion was presented to the court.”
Dossey v. State, 964 P.2d 782 (Nev. 1998). · cites it 2× “He argues that because the information only endorsed Walrath as “Sierra Nevada Laboratories: lab technician,” her name was not properly endorsed as required by NRS 173.045(2). 1 The state responds that it did not know the name of the specific lab technician who analyzed Dossey’s…”
Parsons v. Fifth Jud. Dist. Court, 885 P.2d 1316 (Nev. 1994). “See NRS 173.045. In the instant case, the State did not agree to the amendment; therefore, there was no misdemeanor charge pending against Parsons when the justice court permitted him to enter a plea.”
Smithart v. State, 478 P.2d 576 (Nev. 1970). “080 (now NRS 173.045), which requires the endorsements of witnesses on an information did not apply to an indictment.”
Doyle v. State, 765 P.2d 1156 (Nev. 1988). “2d 1236, 1238 (1980) (citing NRS 173.045(2)). While Mr. Harmon argued that Farrar was not a prosecution witness until the terms upon which he had conditioned his cooperation had been satisfied, 1 we believe that Mr.”
Wilson v. State, 498 P.2d 1342 (Nev. 1972). “However, the record shows that when the prosecutor called investigator Wills to the stand, appellant’s counsel did not object that the investigator’s testimony would be incompetent as hearsay, or deny appellant’s right to confrontation. An objection then made, that forms the…”
State v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Zogheib), 2014 NV 18 (Nev. 2014). · cites it 2× “See NRS 173.045; NRS 252.070(1). But the chief deputy involved in Collier had much more hands-on responsibility for the cases handled by the office than the district attorney in this case does.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 173.045(1) — 1 case
Ryan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., in & for Cty. of Clark, 503 P.2d 842 (Nev. 1972). “Neither does NRS 173.045, subsection 1, which provides that all informations shall be filed in the court having jurisdiction of the offense named, by the district attorney of the proper county as informant.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 173.045(2) — 8 cases
Redmen v. State, 828 P.2d 395 (Nev. 1992). “NRS 173.045(2) requires the district attorney to endorse such witnesses as are known to him at the time of the filing of the information.”
Jones v. State, 937 P.2d 55 (Nev. 1997). “The district court did not commit reversible error in permitting unendorsed witness Brian Wraxall to testify In a related issue, Jones claims that the State's failure to strictly comply with the provisions of NRS 173.045(2), [4] which requires endorsement of prosecution…”
Alward v. State, 912 P.2d 243 (Nev. 1996). “Alward raises numerous contentions on appeal, including whether: (1) the State concealed its theory of the case, (2) the State violated NRS 173.045(2) by listing numerous witnesses, and only calling a few of those witnesses, (3) evidence pertaining to Alward's character was…”
Owens v. State, 620 P.2d 1236 (Nev. 1980). “NRS 173.045(2). However, a defendant’s right *883 to confront witnesses is not violated by the trial court’s refusal to disclose the address of a witness if disclosure could subject the witness to harassment, humiliation or danger.”
Barker v. State, 594 P.2d 719 (Nev. 1979). “The prosecutor did not learn of the testimony until the evening before the motion was presented to the court.”
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.