Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.495 (2026)

New warrant generally

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 176.495  New warrant generally.

      1.  If for any reason a judgment of death has not been executed, and it remains in force, the court in which the conviction was had must, upon the application of the Attorney General or the district attorney of the county in which the conviction was had, cause another warrant to be drawn, signed by the judge and attested by the clerk under the seal of the court, and delivered to the Director of the Department of Corrections.

      2.  The warrant must state the conviction and judgment and appoint a week, the first day being Monday and the last day being Sunday, within which the judgment is to be executed. The first day of that week must be not less than 15 days nor more than 30 days after the date of the warrant. The Director shall execute a sentence of death within the week the judgment is to be executed, as designated by the district court. The Director may execute the judgment at any time during that week if a stay of execution is not entered by a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1442; A 1977, 863; 1989, 391; 2001 Special Session, 221; 2003, 2083)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1969–2022 · leading case: Floyd v. Daniels (D. Nev. 2021).
Floyd v. Daniels (D. Nev. 2021). · cites it 7× “Once the state court 14 issues the Order of Execution, the State can seek a Warrant of Execution pursuant to NRS §176.495 15 in order to be able carry out the execution.”
Floyd (Zane) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (Nev. 2022). · cites it 5× “We disagree with Floyd's narrow interpretation of "the court" as used in NRS 176.495 and NRS 176.505(1) and (2)—that it refers specifically and narrowly to the department in which the conviction or sentence was obtained.”
Floyd (Zane) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) (Nev. 2021). · cites it 2× “CCDA Wolfson has not violated the separation-of-powers clause in seeking the execution warrant given that he is authorized to do so under NRS 176.495. And as the officer with policymaking authority for his office, NRS 252.”
State Vs. Alvogen, Inc. C/W 77365 (Nev. 2019). “In light of the district court's findings and recognition that no execution is currently scheduled, we disagree that the preliminary injunction, and these appeals therefrom, remain viable.”
State Vs. Alvogen, Inc. C/W 77365 (Nev. 2019). “In light of the district court's findings and recognition that no execution is currently scheduled, we disagree that the preliminary injunction, and these appeals therefrom, remain viable.”
Rainsberger v. State, 449 P.2d 254 (Nev. 1969). “: Appellant contends that the warrant of execution rendered on April 9, 1968 directing death by administration of lethal gas on May 2, 1968 is invalid because the judge who signed the warrant was not the successor in office of the judge who heard the plea of guilty as required…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.495(3) — 1 case
Rainsberger v. State, 449 P.2d 254 (Nev. 1969). “: Appellant contends that the warrant of execution rendered on April 9, 1968 directing death by administration of lethal gas on May 2, 1968 is invalid because the judge who signed the warrant was not the successor in office of the judge who heard the plea of guilty as required…”
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.