NRS
176.015 Prompt hearing; court may commit defendant or continue or alter
bail before hearing; statement by defendant; presentation of mitigating
evidence; rights of victim; notice of hearing.
1. Sentence must be imposed without
unreasonable delay. Pending sentence, the court may commit the defendant or
continue or alter the bail.
2. Before imposing sentence, the court
shall:
(a) Afford counsel an opportunity to speak on
behalf of the defendant; and
(b) Address the defendant personally and ask the
defendant if:
(1) The defendant wishes to make a
statement in his or her own behalf and to present any information in mitigation
of punishment; and
(2) The defendant is a veteran or a member
of the military. If the defendant meets the qualifications of subsection 1 of NRS 176A.280, the court may, if
appropriate, assign the defendant to:
(I) A program of treatment
established pursuant to NRS 176A.280;
or
(II) If a program of treatment
established pursuant to NRS 176A.280
is not available for the defendant, a program of treatment established pursuant
to NRS 176A.230 or 176A.250.
3. After hearing any statements presented
pursuant to subsection 2 and before imposing sentence, the court shall afford
the victim an opportunity to:
(a) Appear personally, by counsel or by personal
representative; and
(b) Reasonably express any views concerning the
crime, the person responsible, the impact of the crime on the victim and the need
for restitution.
4. The prosecutor shall give reasonable
notice of the hearing to impose sentence to:
(a) The person against whom the crime was
committed;
(b) A person who was injured as a direct result
of the commission of the crime;
(c) The surviving spouse, parents or children of
a person who was killed as a direct result of the commission of the crime; and
(d) Any other relative or victim who requests in
writing to be notified of the hearing.
Ê Any defect
in notice or failure of such persons to appear are not grounds for an appeal or
the granting of a writ of habeas corpus. All personal information, including,
but not limited to, a current or former address, which pertains to a victim or
relative and which is received by the prosecutor pursuant to this subsection is
confidential.
5. For the purposes of this section:
(a) “Member of the military” has the meaning
ascribed to it in NRS 176A.043.
(b) “Relative” of a person includes:
(1) A spouse, parent, grandparent or
stepparent;
(2) A natural born child, stepchild or
adopted child;
(3) A grandchild, brother, sister, half
brother or half sister; or
(4) A parent of a spouse.
(c) “Veteran” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 176A.090.
(d) “Victim” includes:
(1) A person, including a governmental
entity, against whom a crime has been committed;
(2) A person who has been injured or
killed as a direct result of the commission of a crime; and
(3) A relative of a person described in
subparagraph (1) or (2).
6. This section does not restrict the
authority of the court to consider any reliable and relevant evidence at the
time of sentencing.
(Added to NRS by 1967,
1432; A 1989,
1425; 1991,
90; 1995,
371; 1997,
3236; 2001,
889; 2009,
100; 2017,
3018; 2019,
4380)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
59
cases (
9 in the last 5 years), 1973–2023 · leading case:
Lane v. State, 881 P.2d 1358 (Nev. 1994).
Lane v. State, 881 P.2d 1358 (Nev. 1994).
· cites it 10× “Fourth, Lane states that he was denied a fair penalty hearing because the district court admitted evidence which violated NRS 176.015 [1] , and which was unduly prejudicial.”
Buschauer v. State, 804 P.2d 1046 (Nev. 1990).
· cites it 9× “1 Subsections (3)-(4) of NRS 176.015 provide in part: 3. Before imposing sentence the court shall afford the victim an opportunity to: (a) Appear personally or by counsel; and (b) Reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, the impact of the crime…”
Randell v. State, 846 P.2d 278 (Nev. 1993).
· cites it 5× “2 Specifically, Randell contends that nothing in NRS 176.015 authorizes a victim to express a view as to the amount of prison time to which the defendant should be sentenced.”
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
· cites it 24× “: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
Martinez v. State, 974 P.2d 133 (Nev. 1999).
· cites it 6× “See NRS 176.015. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s judgment of conviction, and we vacate that portion of the judgment directing that restitution be paid directly to Humana Insurance Company.”
Betterman v. Montana, 136 S. Ct. 1609 (2016).
“§ 46-18-115 (2015); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015 (1) (2013); N.H.”
O'NEILL v. State, 153 P.3d 38 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 3× “Allocution O’Neill contends that the district court denied his statutory right to allocution pursuant to NRS 176.015(2)(b). In this, he claims that the district court never offered him an opportunity to make a statement as required under NRS 176.”
Wood v. State, 892 P.2d 944 (Nev. 1995).
· cites it 7× “Appellant contends that the district court erred in allowing the minor’s mother to testify because she is not a “victim” as defined by NRS 176.015 1 and NRS 213.005. 2 Specifically, appellant *430 contends that the minor’s mother is not a “surviving parent” under NRS 213.”
Chaparro (osbaldo) Vs. State, 2021 NV 68 (Nev. 2021).
· cites it 3× “NRS 176.015(1), his desire to appeal the conviction, and the risk of furthering the spread of a contagious disease with his right to be present at the hearing and the prospect of an indefinite delay.”
Means v. State, 103 P.3d 25 (Nev. 2004).
“2 NRS 176.015(3)(a), (b). 3 In violation of NRS 50.”
Smith v. State, 881 P.2d 649 (Nev. 1994).
· cites it 5× “4 Smith claims that the district court erred in admitting McEachin’s testimony regarding Wendy and Kristy since it was outside the scope of the “victim impact statute,” NRS 176.015. 5 Smith’s *1106 reliance on NRS 176.”
Castillo v. State, 874 P.2d 1252 (Nev. 1994).
· cites it 4× “NRS 176.015(3)(b) provides a victim the opportunity to appear personally or by counsel and reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, and the impact of the crime on the victim.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(1) — 5 cases
Chaparro (osbaldo) Vs. State, 2021 NV 68 (Nev. 2021).
“NRS 176.015(1), his desire to appeal the conviction, and the risk of furthering the spread of a contagious disease with his right to be present at the hearing and the prospect of an indefinite delay.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(2) — 4 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(2)(b) — 2 cases
O'NEILL v. State, 153 P.3d 38 (Nev. 2007).
“Allocution O’Neill contends that the district court denied his statutory right to allocution pursuant to NRS 176.015(2)(b). In this, he claims that the district court never offered him an opportunity to make a statement as required under NRS 176.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(2)(b)(1) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(3) — 23 cases
Buschauer v. State, 804 P.2d 1046 (Nev. 1990).
“1 Subsections (3)-(4) of NRS 176.015 provide in part: 3. Before imposing sentence the court shall afford the victim an opportunity to: (a) Appear personally or by counsel; and (b) Reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, the impact of the crime…”
Randell v. State, 846 P.2d 278 (Nev. 1993).
“2 Specifically, Randell contends that nothing in NRS 176.015 authorizes a victim to express a view as to the amount of prison time to which the defendant should be sentenced.”
Wood v. State, 892 P.2d 944 (Nev. 1995).
“Appellant contends that the district court erred in allowing the minor’s mother to testify because she is not a “victim” as defined by NRS 176.015 1 and NRS 213.005. 2 Specifically, appellant *430 contends that the minor’s mother is not a “surviving parent” under NRS 213.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(3)(a) — 1 case
Means v. State, 103 P.3d 25 (Nev. 2004).
“2 NRS 176.015(3)(a), (b). 3 In violation of NRS 50.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(3)(b) — 18 cases
Castillo v. State, 874 P.2d 1252 (Nev. 1994).
“NRS 176.015(3)(b) provides a victim the opportunity to appear personally or by counsel and reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, and the impact of the crime on the victim.”
Smith v. State, 881 P.2d 649 (Nev. 1994).
“4 Smith claims that the district court erred in admitting McEachin’s testimony regarding Wendy and Kristy since it was outside the scope of the “victim impact statute,” NRS 176.015. 5 Smith’s *1106 reliance on NRS 176.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(4) — 2 cases
Buschauer v. State, 804 P.2d 1046 (Nev. 1990).
“1 Subsections (3)-(4) of NRS 176.015 provide in part: 3. Before imposing sentence the court shall afford the victim an opportunity to: (a) Appear personally or by counsel; and (b) Reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, the impact of the crime…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5) — 3 cases
Castillo v. State, 874 P.2d 1252 (Nev. 1994).
“NRS 176.015(3)(b) provides a victim the opportunity to appear personally or by counsel and reasonably express any views concerning the crime, the person responsible, and the impact of the crime on the victim.”
Smith v. State, 881 P.2d 649 (Nev. 1994).
“4 Smith claims that the district court erred in admitting McEachin’s testimony regarding Wendy and Kristy since it was outside the scope of the “victim impact statute,” NRS 176.015. 5 Smith’s *1106 reliance on NRS 176.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5)(b) — 2 cases
Martinez v. State, 974 P.2d 133 (Nev. 1999).
“See NRS 176.015. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s judgment of conviction, and we vacate that portion of the judgment directing that restitution be paid directly to Humana Insurance Company.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5)(b)(1) — 1 case
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
“: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5)(d) — 4 cases
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
“: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5)(d)(1) — 1 case
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
“: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(5Xd) — 1 case
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
“: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.015(6) — 4 cases
Aparicio (henry) Vs. State, 2021 NV 62 (Nev. 2021).
“: Article 1, Section 8A of the Nevada Constitution, also known as Marsy's Law, and NRS 176.015 both afford a victim the right to be heard at sentencing.”
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.