Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 175.301 (2026)

Testimony of person upon or with whom abortion was allegedly committed

✓ current as of July 2026

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

NRS 175.301 Testimony of person upon or with whom abortion was allegedly committed. Upon a trial for procuring or attempting to procure an abortion, or aiding or assisting therein, the defendant must not be convicted upon the testimony of the person upon or with whom the offense has allegedly been committed, unless:

1. The testimony of that person is corroborated by other evidence; or

2. The person giving the testimony is, and was at the time the crime is alleged to have taken place, a police officer or deputy sheriff who was performing his or her duties as such.

(Added to NRS by 1967, 1429; A 1979, 302; 1981, 1029; 2005, 308)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1980–2011 · leading case: Ford v. State, 262 P.3d 1123 (Nev. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ford v. State, 262 P.3d 1123 (Nev. 2011). · cites it 3× “300(l)(a) applies to undercover sting operations is NRS 175.301, which, until 2005, 2005 Nev.”

Sheriff v. Hilliard, 608 P.2d 1111 (Nev. 1980). · cites it 3× “Richardson testified that Hilliard approached her at the bar of the El Cortez Hotel and asked if she would work for him as a prostitute. In addition to Richardson’s testimony, a second police officer testified that he knew Hilliard to be a pimp, observed Richardson’s…”

Shults v. State, 616 P.2d 388 (Nev. 1980). “In that case, the victim’s testimony required corroboration under NRS 175.301 and the accomplice’s testimony required corroboration under *751 NRS 175.”

Amen v. State, 801 P.2d 1354 (Nev. 1990). “291 for accomplice testimony; the other required corroboration under NRS 175.301 concerning testimony by a person claiming to be enticed for prostitution.”

Sheriff v. Gordon, 606 P.2d 533 (Nev. 1980). · cites it 2× “In his petition, Gordon argued that the indictment must be dismissed because Sara’s testimony was not corroborated as required by NRS 175.301, 3 and Carl’s testimony was not corroborated as required by NRS 175.”

Sheriff, Clark Cnty. v. Horner, 608 P.2d 1106 (Nev. 1980). · cites it 3× “See NRS 175.301. 3 and NRS 175.291 4 Sara’s testimony as to the charge of living from the earnings of a prostitute, however, requires no corroboration because NRS 175.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 175.301(2) — 1 case

Ford v. State, 262 P.3d 1123 (Nev. 2011). “300(l)(a) applies to undercover sting operations is NRS 175.301, which, until 2005, 2005 Nev.”

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.