Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 193 - CRIMINALITY GENERALLY
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 193.150 (2026)

Punishment of misdemeanors

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 193.150  Punishment of misdemeanors.

      1.  Every person convicted of a misdemeanor shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of not more than $1,000, or by both fine and imprisonment, unless the statute in force at the time of commission of such misdemeanor prescribed a different penalty.

      2.  In lieu of all or a part of the punishment which may be imposed pursuant to subsection 1, the convicted person may be sentenced to perform a fixed period of community service pursuant to the conditions prescribed in NRS 176.087.

      [1911 C&P § 20; RL § 6285; NCL § 9969]—(NRS A 1967, 459; 1981, 487, 652; 1991, 1931; 2001 Special Session, 136)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1968–2026 · leading case: Thomas v. State, 634 A.2d 1 (Md. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Thomas v. State, 634 A.2d 1 (Md. 1993). · cites it 2× “Nevada 6 months and/or $1,000, Nev.Rev.Stat. §§ 193.150, 200.471 and 200.”
State v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct.(pullin), 188 P.3d 1079 (Nev. 2008). “140, and to all misdemeanors under NRS 193.150, but to exclude category A felonies, felonies where another specific statute sets forth the punishment, and sentence enhancements.”
Lapinski v. State, 446 P.2d 645 (Nev. 1968). “Affirmed in part and remanded for sentencing pursuant to NRS 193.150. Thompson, C. J., Collins, Batjer, and Mowbray, JJ.”
United Healthcare Ins. Co. v. Fremont Emergency Servs. (mandavia), Ltd. c/w 85656, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 29 (Nev. 2025). “SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 28 ((» 1947A MOOD While the damage here was entirely economic, TeamHealth presented some evidence that United manipulated data to make it seem as if the reimbursements were objectively set and reasonable, when in reality, they were not.”
Cornella (mary Lou) Vs. Churchill Co. (state), 2016 NV 58 (Nev. 2016). · cites it 2× “13 NRS 193.150(1). In contrast, the Nevada offense that carries a penalty similar to the Pennsylvania statute—reckless driving causing death or substantial bodily harm—includes a criminal intent more akin to criminal or gross negligence.”
Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, Inc. v. State of Nev. (civil), 142 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 40 (Nev. 2026). · cites it 2× “257; see NRS 193.150 (punishment for a misdemeanor 1s up to six months of imprisonment, a monetary fine of up to $1,000, or both).”
Cornella (mary Lou) Vs. Churchill Co. (state), 2016 NV 58 (Nev. 2016). “13 NRS 193.150(1). In contrast, the Nevada offense that carries a penalty similar to the Pennsylvania statute—reckless driving causing death or substantial bodily harm—includes a criminal intent more akin to criminal or gross negligence.”
Fuentes Reyes v. Wolf (D. Nev. 2020). “NRS 193.150. 5 The 2018 IJ Decision states that Petitioner “was convicted of battery in May 2017.”
Henderson City Attorney v. Cerrone, 557 P.3d 979 (Nev. 2024). “NRS 193.150(1) (stating default punishment for misdemeanors); NRS 200.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 193.150(1) — 3 cases
Cornella (mary Lou) Vs. Churchill Co. (state), 2016 NV 58 (Nev. 2016). “13 NRS 193.150(1). In contrast, the Nevada offense that carries a penalty similar to the Pennsylvania statute—reckless driving causing death or substantial bodily harm—includes a criminal intent more akin to criminal or gross negligence.”
Cornella (mary Lou) Vs. Churchill Co. (state), 2016 NV 58 (Nev. 2016). “13 NRS 193.150(1). In contrast, the Nevada offense that carries a penalty similar to the Pennsylvania statute—reckless driving causing death or substantial bodily harm—includes a criminal intent more akin to criminal or gross negligence.”
Henderson City Attorney v. Cerrone, 557 P.3d 979 (Nev. 2024). “NRS 193.150(1) (stating default punishment for misdemeanors); NRS 200.”
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.