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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515 (2026)

Court may grant new trial or vacate judgment in certain circumstances

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 176.515  Court may grant new trial or vacate judgment in certain circumstances.

      1.  The court may grant a new trial to a defendant if required as a matter of law or on the ground of newly discovered evidence.

      2.  If trial was by the court without a jury, the court may vacate the judgment if entered, take additional testimony and direct the entry of a new judgment.

      3.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 176.09187, a motion for a new trial based on the ground of newly discovered evidence may be made only within 2 years after the verdict or finding of guilt.

      4.  A motion for a new trial based on any other grounds must be made within 7 days after the verdict or finding of guilt or within such further time as the court may fix during the 7-day period.

      (Added to NRS by 1967, 1443; A 1983, 1671; 2003, 1894; 2011, 280; 2013, 1856; 2015, 785; 2017, 1480)

ARREST OF JUDGMENT

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 75 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993). · cites it 2× “§ 29-2103 (1989) (three years); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515 (3) (1991) (two years); N.”
Browning v. State, 91 P.3d 39 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 3× “*371 Browning asserts that the district court should have granted a new trial under NRS 176.515 based upon the discovery of new evidence — the testimony of Frederick Ross.”
Evans v. State, 926 P.2d 265 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 4× “He insists that the correct standard "is one in which the district court makes an independent evaluation of the evidence presented, including the credibility of the witnesses." We disagree. Evans has confused the standard that a district court must use in deciding whether to…”
Servin v. State, 32 P.3d 1277 (Nev. 2001). · cites it 4× “Servin continues to argue on appeal that the information that Winkelman provided after the trial relating to alleged inculpatory statements made to him by Allen qualifies as newly discovered evidence pursuant to NRS 176.515. [45] Servin contends that Allen was so important a…”
State v. Bennett, 81 P.3d 1 (Nev. 2003). · cites it 2× “[28] See NRS 176.515 (providing that a new trial may be granted based on the ground of newly discovered evidence).”
Ouanbengboune v. State, 220 P.3d 1122 (Nev. 2009). · cites it 3× “If there is a challenge to the interpreter’s translation of the trial testimony, the challenging party should either move for a new trial under NRS 176.515 if the translation inaccuracies are discovered within the applicable time frame or, in the alternative, move to modify or…”
Washington v. State, 655 P.2d 531 (Nev. 1982). · cites it 6× “The district court denied appellant’s motion, concluding that NRS 176.515 does not permit a new trial to be granted for insufficiency of the evidence.”
Washington v. State, 655 P.2d 531 (Nev. 1982). · cites it 6× “The district court denied appellant's motion, concluding that NRS 176.515 does not permit a new trial to be granted for insufficiency of the evidence.”
Sanborn v. State, 812 P.2d 1279 (Nev. 1991). · cites it 2× “NRS 176.515(1). The grant or denial of a new trial on this ground is within the trial court's discretion and will not be reversed on appeal absent its abuse.”
Hargrove v. State, 686 P.2d 222 (Nev. 1984). “See NRS 176.515; NRS 176.165. Both motions serve an identical function, since both argue that the predicate of guilt, whether it be plea or verdict, is suspect or defective and must be set aside.”
Porter v. State, 576 P.2d 275 (Nev. 1978). · cites it 2× “NRS 176.515. The evidence consisted essentially of a purported polygraph examination of John Jones in which he allegedly truthfully admitted *280 the robbery and the affidavit of a court-appointed investigator stating that Jones had admitted committing the robbery.”
State v. Walker, 857 P.2d 1 (Nev. 1993). · cites it 4× “The district court issued an order, accompanied by findings of fact and conclusions of law, vacating Walker’s conviction of murder and granting Walker a new trial on this charge pursuant to NRS 176.515. 1 The district court based its decision on its finding that “there was…”
Show all 75 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515(1) — 19 cases
Servin v. State, 32 P.3d 1277 (Nev. 2001). “Servin continues to argue on appeal that the information that Winkelman provided after the trial relating to alleged inculpatory statements made to him by Allen qualifies as newly discovered evidence pursuant to NRS 176.515. [45] Servin contends that Allen was so important a…”
Sanborn v. State, 812 P.2d 1279 (Nev. 1991). “NRS 176.515(1). The grant or denial of a new trial on this ground is within the trial court's discretion and will not be reversed on appeal absent its abuse.”
Biondi v. State, 699 P.2d 1062 (Nev. 1985).
Vallery v. State, 46 P.3d 66 (Nev. 2002).
Funches v. State, 944 P.2d 775 (Nev. 1997).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515(2) — 1 case
Bautista-Eredea (Eberto) Vs. State (Nev. 2020).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515(3) — 17 cases
Browning v. State, 91 P.3d 39 (Nev. 2004). “*371 Browning asserts that the district court should have granted a new trial under NRS 176.515 based upon the discovery of new evidence — the testimony of Frederick Ross.”
Ybarra v. State, 628 P.2d 297 (Nev. 1981).
Huneycutt v. Huneycutt, 575 P.2d 585 (Nev. 1978).
D'Agostino v. State, 915 P.2d 264 (Nev. 1996).
Layton v. State, 510 P.2d 864 (Nev. 1973).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176.515(4) — 11 cases
Evans v. State, 926 P.2d 265 (Nev. 1996). “He insists that the correct standard "is one in which the district court makes an independent evaluation of the evidence presented, including the credibility of the witnesses." We disagree. Evans has confused the standard that a district court must use in deciding whether to…”
DePasquale v. State, 803 P.2d 218 (Nev. 1990).
State v. Wilson, 760 P.2d 129 (Nev. 1988).
Alfaro v. State (Nev. 2023).
Brioady (jericho) Vs. State, 2017 NV 41 (Nev. 2017).
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.