NRS
202.285 Discharging firearm at or into structure, vehicle, aircraft or
watercraft; penalties.
1. A person who willfully and maliciously
discharges a firearm at or into any house, room, apartment, tenement, shop,
warehouse, store, mill, barn, stable, outhouse or other building, tent, vessel,
aircraft, vehicle, vehicle trailer, semitrailer or house trailer, railroad
locomotive, car or tender:
(a) If it has been abandoned, is guilty of a
misdemeanor unless a greater penalty is provided in NRS 202.287.
(b) If it is occupied, is guilty of a category B
felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum
term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 10 years, or
by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both fine and imprisonment.
2. Whenever a firearm is so discharged at
or into any vessel, aircraft, vehicle, vehicle trailer, semitrailer or house
trailer, railroad locomotive, car or tender, in motion or at rest, and it
cannot with reasonable certainty be ascertained in what county the crime was
committed, the offender may be arrested and tried in any county through which
the vessel, aircraft, vehicle, vehicle trailer, semitrailer or house trailer, locomotive
or railroad car may have run on the trip during which the firearm was
discharged at or into it.
(Added to NRS by 1979,
157; A 1989,
1240; 1995,
1206; 2019,
231)
Notes of Decisions
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
· cites it 20× “The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
· cites it 10× “The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
Cameron (Wayne) v. State (Nev. 2022).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, NRS 202.285(1)(b) already criminalizes discharging a gun into a structure as a category B felony, and it would be improper to construe NRS 193.”
Dale (D. Nev. 2025).
· cites it 2× “” NRS § 202.285(1). 13 The Nevada Court of Appeals concluded that the State presented sufficient 14 evidence to prove the requisite intent: 15 Appellant Eric Dale contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the jury’s finding of guilt.”
Love-Camp (Royal) v. State (Nev. 2019).
“NRS 202.285(1). Here, Love-Camp's defense theory was that he shot the boyfriend in self-defense because he thought the boyfriend had a weapon and was chasing after him to harm him.”
Love-Camp (Royal) v. State (Nev. 2019).
“NRS 202.285(1). Here, Love-Camp's defense theory was that he shot the boyfriend in self-defense because he thought the boyfriend had a weapon and was chasing after him to harm him.”
Fox (Derek) Vs. State, 484 P.3d 277 (Nev. 2021).
“471(1) (defining assault); NRS 202.285(1) (defining discharging a firearm at or into a structure).”
Benitez v. City of Reno (D. Nev. 2025).
“See NRS 202.285 (discharging a 18 firearm at an occupied building is a category B felony carrying one-to-10-year term in 19 prison and/or up to $5,000 fine).”
Bennett (Justin) v. State (Nev. 2013).
“While the prosecutor's comments concerning the application of release credits was erroneous, see NRS 202.285(1)(b) (discharging a firearm at or into a structure); NRS 202.”
Martinez (Luis) v. State (Nev. 2014).
“020, NRS 202.285. Considering the phone calls to Romero and others, the meeting at Martinez's house in Sparks, and the period of collectively searching followed by agreeing to shoot at Patino's apartment, the jury could also reasonably infer that Martinez conspired with another…”
Owens (Jason) v. State (Nev. 2015).
“481(1)(a); NRS 202.285(1)(b). Therefore, we conclude that Owens' contention is without merit.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 202.285(1) — 6 cases
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
“The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
“The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
Dale (D. Nev. 2025).
“” NRS § 202.285(1). 13 The Nevada Court of Appeals concluded that the State presented sufficient 14 evidence to prove the requisite intent: 15 Appellant Eric Dale contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the jury’s finding of guilt.”
Love-Camp (Royal) v. State (Nev. 2019).
“NRS 202.285(1). Here, Love-Camp's defense theory was that he shot the boyfriend in self-defense because he thought the boyfriend had a weapon and was chasing after him to harm him.”
Love-Camp (Royal) v. State (Nev. 2019).
“NRS 202.285(1). Here, Love-Camp's defense theory was that he shot the boyfriend in self-defense because he thought the boyfriend had a weapon and was chasing after him to harm him.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 202.285(1)(a) — 2 cases
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
“The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
Washington (matthew) Vs. State, 2016 NV 65 (Nev. 2016).
“The unit of prosecution in NRS 202.285 does not turn on the word "firearm" but instead on the meaning of the verb "discharges.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 202.285(1)(b) — 3 cases
Cameron (Wayne) v. State (Nev. 2022).
“Moreover, NRS 202.285(1)(b) already criminalizes discharging a gun into a structure as a category B felony, and it would be improper to construe NRS 193.”
Bennett (Justin) v. State (Nev. 2013).
“While the prosecutor's comments concerning the application of release credits was erroneous, see NRS 202.285(1)(b) (discharging a firearm at or into a structure); NRS 202.”
Owens (Jason) v. State (Nev. 2015).
“481(1)(a); NRS 202.285(1)(b). Therefore, we conclude that Owens' contention is without merit.”
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.