Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 176 - JUDGMENT AND EXECUTION

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145

Presentence investigation and report: Contents of report

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 176.145  Presentence investigation and report: Contents of report.

      1.  The report of any presentence investigation must contain:

      (a) Any:

             (1) Prior criminal convictions of the defendant;

             (2) Unresolved criminal cases involving the defendant;

             (3) Incidents in which the defendant has failed to appear in court when his or her presence was required;

             (4) Arrests during the 10 years immediately preceding the date of the offense for which the report is being prepared; and

             (5) Participation in any program in a specialty court or any diversionary program, including whether the defendant successfully completed the program;

      (b) Information concerning the characteristics of the defendant, the defendant’s financial condition, including whether the information pertaining to the defendant’s financial condition has been verified, the circumstances affecting the defendant’s behavior and the circumstances of the defendant’s offense that may be helpful in imposing sentence, in granting probation or in the correctional treatment of the defendant;

      (c) Information concerning the effect that the offense committed by the defendant has had upon the victim, including, without limitation, any physical or psychological harm or financial loss suffered by the victim, to the extent that such information is available from the victim or other sources, but the provisions of this paragraph do not require any particular examination or testing of the victim, and the extent of any investigation or examination is solely at the discretion of the court or the Division and the extent of the information to be included in the report is solely at the discretion of the Division;

      (d) Information concerning whether the defendant has an obligation for the support of a child, and if so, whether the defendant is in arrears in payment on that obligation;

      (e) Data or information concerning reports and investigations thereof made pursuant to chapter 432B of NRS and NRS 392.275 to 392.365, inclusive, that relate to the defendant and are made available pursuant to NRS 432B.290 or NRS 392.317 to 392.337, inclusive, as applicable;

      (f) The results of any evaluation or assessment of the defendant conducted pursuant to NRS 176A.240, 176A.260, 176A.280 or 484C.300; and

      (g) If a psychosexual evaluation of the defendant is required pursuant to NRS 176.139, a written report of the results of the psychosexual evaluation of the defendant and all information that is necessary to carry out the provisions of NRS 176A.110.

      2.  The Division shall include in the report the source of any information, as stated in the report, related to the defendant’s offense, including, without limitation, information from:

      (a) A police report;

      (b) An investigative report filed with law enforcement; or

      (c) Any other source available to the Division.

      3.  The Division may include in the report any additional information that it believes may be helpful in imposing a sentence, in granting probation or in correctional treatment.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1434; A 1973, 178; 1981, 21, 1208; 1985, 148; 1989, 1853; 1993, 8, 1513, 2016; 1995, 667, 1248; 1997, 837, 1639; 1999, 1190, 1287; 2001, 77, 1637; 2017, 2062, 2839; 2019, 4384; 2021, 2422)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1972–2023 · leading case: Lodowski v. State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lodowski v. State (1986) md · cites it 2× “1984); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 176.145 3 (1981); N.J. Stat.”
Thomas v. State (1972) nev · cites it 5× “On appeal, appellant claims the court erred because: (1) the report did not contain a “statement either that such recommendation is the normal punishment for like offenses in the United States or of the reasons for recommending a punishment more or less severe than the normal,”…”
Stockmeier v. State, Board of Parole Commissioners (2011) nev “NRS 176.145(1). Because the sentencing court will rely on a defendant’s PSI, the PSI must not include information based on “impalpable or highly suspect evidence.”
Ferris v. State (1984) nev · cites it 3× “See NRS 176.145. 1 Appellant now contends that the district court erred in denying his motion to strike the challenged information.”
Lloyd v. State (1978) nev “See NRS 176.145. It has no binding power on the court.”
Buschauer v. State (1990) nev “First, where a victim cannot or does not wish to appear in court, the statement may be placed in written form in the presentence report pursuant to NRS 176.145. Second, the victim may give an oral statement at the sentencing hearing pursuant to NRS 176.”
Hall v. State (1973) nev “The record does not contain a copy of *372 the presentence investigation nor a transcript of the proceedings in district court at the time the appellant was sentenced. The appellant relies on Boles v.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev · cites it 16× “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
Collier (Nyrome) v. State (2016) nev · cites it 7× “NRS 176.145(1)(a) states that the PSI must have the defendant's prior criminal record, but does not provide that it must have the same level of detail about the defendant's prior crimes as his subject offense.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev · cites it 4× “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev · cites it 4× “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
Hermanson (James) Vs. State (2021) nev · cites it 2× “2d 1314, 1315-16 (1972) (recognizing the mandatory language in preparing a presentence investigation report, but holding that preparation of the report pursuant to NRS 176.145 was not jurisdictional); see also United States v.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1) — 5 cases
Stockmeier v. State, Board of Parole Commissioners (2011) nev “NRS 176.145(1). Because the sentencing court will rely on a defendant’s PSI, the PSI must not include information based on “impalpable or highly suspect evidence.”
Thomas v. State (1972) nev “On appeal, appellant claims the court erred because: (1) the report did not contain a “statement either that such recommendation is the normal punishment for like offenses in the United States or of the reasons for recommending a punishment more or less severe than the normal,”…”
Scott (Christian) Vs. State (2021) nev
Bolden v. State (2023) nev
Bolden v. State (2023) nevapp
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1)(a) — 1 case
Collier (Nyrome) v. State (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(a) states that the PSI must have the defendant's prior criminal record, but does not provide that it must have the same level of detail about the defendant's prior crimes as his subject offense.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1)(b) — 4 cases
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
Collier (Nyrome) v. State (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(a) states that the PSI must have the defendant's prior criminal record, but does not provide that it must have the same level of detail about the defendant's prior crimes as his subject offense.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1)(c) — 1 case
Wenker (Ronald) v. State (2013) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1)(g) — 3 cases
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(1)(i) — 1 case
Smith (Thomas) v. State (2015) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(2) — 4 cases
Thomas v. State (1972) nev “On appeal, appellant claims the court erred because: (1) the report did not contain a “statement either that such recommendation is the normal punishment for like offenses in the United States or of the reasons for recommending a punishment more or less severe than the normal,”…”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
BLANKENSHIP (LERON) VS. STATE C/W 66944 (2016) nev “NRS 176.145(1)(b) states that a PSI "must contain.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.145(3) — 1 case
Thomas v. State (1972) nev “On appeal, appellant claims the court erred because: (1) the report did not contain a “statement either that such recommendation is the normal punishment for like offenses in the United States or of the reasons for recommending a punishment more or less severe than the normal,”…”
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.