NRS
34.500 Grounds for discharge in certain cases. If
it appears on the return of the writ of habeas corpus that the petitioner is in
custody by virtue of process from any court of this State, or judge or officer
thereof, the petitioner may be discharged in any one of the following cases:
1. When the jurisdiction of the court or
officer has been exceeded.
2. When the imprisonment was at first
lawful, yet by some act, omission or event, which has taken place afterwards,
the petitioner has become entitled to be discharged.
3. When the process is defective in some
matter of substance required by law, rendering it void.
4. When the process, though proper in
form, has been issued in a case not allowed by law.
5. When the person having the custody of
the petitioner is not the person allowed by law to detain the petitioner.
6. Where the process is not authorized by
any judgment, order or decree of any court, nor by any provision of law.
7. Where the petitioner has been committed
or indicted on a criminal charge, including a misdemeanor, except misdemeanor
violations of chapters 484A to 484E, inclusive, of NRS or any ordinance
adopted by a city or county to regulate traffic, without reasonable or probable
cause.
8. Where the petitioner has been committed
or indicted on any criminal charge under a statute or ordinance that is
unconstitutional, or if constitutional on its face is unconstitutional in its
application.
9. Where the court finds that there has
been a specific denial of the petitioner’s constitutional rights with respect
to the petitioner’s conviction or sentence in a criminal case.
[20:93:1862; B § 368; BH § 3690; C § 3762; RL § 6245;
NCL § 11394]—(NRS A 1967,
1469; 1971,
773; 1985,
1236)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
21
cases, 1958–2019 · leading case:
Seim v. State, 590 P.2d 1152 (Nev. 1979).
Seim v. State, 590 P.2d 1152 (Nev. 1979).
· cites it 2× “*1158 NRS 34.500(7). Shelby v. District Court, 82 Nev.”
Cook v. State, 462 P.2d 523 (Nev. 1969).
· cites it 2× “” NRS 34.500(7). Presumably, this embraces insufficiency of the evidence to establish reasonable or probable cause to hold one for trial.”
Shelby v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Court, 414 P.2d 942 (Nev. 1966).
· cites it 2× “Our Constitution and Statute recognize this principle of fairness and provide for its protection by the writ of habeas corpus. Nev. Const. Art. 1, § 5, commands that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may…”
Sheriff of Washoe Cnty. v. Martin, 662 P.2d 634 (Nev. 1983).
“After a hearing on the petition, the district court entered an “Order of Discharge” under NRS 34.500(8), dismissing the charges against Martin on the ground that the definition of cheating in NRS 465.”
Sheriff v. Roylance, 871 P.2d 359 (Nev. 1994).
· cites it 2× “NRS 34.500(7). The district court, however, did not determine that there was insufficient cause to bind over Roylance on the sale or trafficking charges.”
Zobrist v. Sheriff, 614 P.2d 538 (Nev. 1980).
“These are offenses within the original jurisdiction of the district court.”
Victoria v. Young, 392 P.2d 509 (Nev. 1964).
“NRS 34.500 provides that when it appears on the return of the writ of habeas corpus that the prisoner is in custody by virtue of process from any court of this state (the said order of commitment “is a process” within the meaning of this statute 1 ), such prisoner nevertheless…”
Application of Laiolo, 426 P.2d 726 (Nev. 1967).
“NRS 34.500(4) [authorizing discharge from restraint when the process, though proper in form, has be.”
Boatwright v. Dir., Dep't of Prison, 849 P.2d 274 (Nev. 1993).
“6, § 6 (district court may issue writs of habeas corpus on behalf of any person held in actual custody in its district); see also NRS 34.500 (court may order discharge of habeas corpus petitioner who is in custody by virtue of process from any court of this state, or judge or…”
Wehrheim v. State, 443 P.2d 607 (Nev. 1968).
“The district court denied the writ, saying that it was premature, since there was an appeal pending in this court. This appeal from the denial of the writ followed.”
Ivey v. State, 420 P.2d 853 (Nev. 1966).
· cites it 2× “NOTES [1] NRS 34.500(7) authorizes discharge from custody or restraint, if one is not committed upon a criminal charge with reasonable or probable cause.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.500(4) — 2 cases
Application of Laiolo, 426 P.2d 726 (Nev. 1967).
“NRS 34.500(4) [authorizing discharge from restraint when the process, though proper in form, has be.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.500(7) — 9 cases
Seim v. State, 590 P.2d 1152 (Nev. 1979).
“*1158 NRS 34.500(7). Shelby v. District Court, 82 Nev.”
Cook v. State, 462 P.2d 523 (Nev. 1969).
“” NRS 34.500(7). Presumably, this embraces insufficiency of the evidence to establish reasonable or probable cause to hold one for trial.”
Shelby v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Court, 414 P.2d 942 (Nev. 1966).
“Our Constitution and Statute recognize this principle of fairness and provide for its protection by the writ of habeas corpus. Nev. Const. Art. 1, § 5, commands that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may…”
Sheriff v. Roylance, 871 P.2d 359 (Nev. 1994).
“NRS 34.500(7). The district court, however, did not determine that there was insufficient cause to bind over Roylance on the sale or trafficking charges.”
Wehrheim v. State, 443 P.2d 607 (Nev. 1968).
“The district court denied the writ, saying that it was premature, since there was an appeal pending in this court. This appeal from the denial of the writ followed.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.500(8) — 1 case
Sheriff of Washoe Cnty. v. Martin, 662 P.2d 634 (Nev. 1983).
“After a hearing on the petition, the district court entered an “Order of Discharge” under NRS 34.500(8), dismissing the charges against Martin on the ground that the definition of cheating in NRS 465.”
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.