Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176A.660 (2026)

Authority of court to order; requirements; enhanced supervision; use of electronic device; limitations

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 176A.660  Authority of court to order; requirements; enhanced supervision; use of electronic device; limitations.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, if a person who has been placed on probation violates a condition of probation, the court may order the person to a term of residential confinement in lieu of causing the sentence imposed to be executed. In making this determination, the court shall consider the criminal record of the person and the seriousness of the crime committed.

      2.  In ordering the person to a term of residential confinement, the court shall:

      (a) Direct that the person be placed under the supervision of the Division and require:

             (1) The person to be confined to the person’s residence during the time the person is away from any employment, community service or other activity authorized by the Division; and

             (2) Enhanced supervision of the person, including, without limitation, unannounced visits to the person’s residence or other locations where the person is expected to be in order to determine whether the person is complying with the terms of confinement; or

      (b) If the person was placed on probation for a felony conviction, direct that the person be placed under the supervision of the Department of Corrections and require the person to be confined to a facility or institution of the Department for a period not to exceed 6 months. The Department may select the facility or institution in which to place the person.

      3.  An electronic device approved by the Division may be used to supervise a person ordered to a term of residential confinement. The device may be capable of using the Global Positioning System, but must be minimally intrusive and limited in capability to recording or transmitting information concerning the person’s location, including, but not limited to, the transmission of still visual images which do not concern the person’s activities, and producing, upon request, reports or records of the person’s presence near or within a crime scene or prohibited area or his or her departure from a specified geographic location. A device which is capable of recording or transmitting:

      (a) Oral or wire communications or any auditory sound; or

      (b) Information concerning the person’s activities,

Ê must not be used.

      4.  The court shall not order a person to a term of residential confinement unless the person agrees to the order.

      5.  A term of residential confinement may not be longer than the unexpired maximum term of a sentence imposed by the court.

      6.  As used in this section:

      (a) “Facility” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 209.065.

      (b) “Institution” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 209.071.

      (Added to NRS by 1987, 2228; A 1991, 57; 1993, 1515; 1995, 1252; 2001 Special Session, 135; 2007, 3185; 2009, 2514; 2015, 350; 2021, 2430)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2003–2003 · leading case: United States v. Giovanni Ramirez, 347 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003).
United States v. Giovanni Ramirez, 347 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003). “378 (West 2002) (establishing probationer violator’s eligibility for a program of institutional correctional alternatives to jail in discipline, exercise, and treatment); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 176A.660(1) (Michie 2003) (allowing probationer to be placed in residential…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 176A.660(1) — 1 case
United States v. Giovanni Ramirez, 347 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003). “378 (West 2002) (establishing probationer violator’s eligibility for a program of institutional correctional alternatives to jail in discipline, exercise, and treatment); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 176A.660(1) (Michie 2003) (allowing probationer to be placed in residential…”
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.