NRS
34.750 Appointment of counsel for indigents; payment of costs incident
to proceedings; pleadings supplemental to petition; response to motion to
dismiss.
1. A petition may allege that the
petitioner is unable to pay the costs of the proceedings or to employ counsel.
If the court is satisfied that the allegation of indigency is true and the
petition is not dismissed summarily, the court may appoint counsel to represent
the petitioner. In making its determination, the court may consider, among
other things, the severity of the consequences facing the petitioner and
whether:
(a) The issues presented are difficult;
(b) The petitioner is unable to comprehend the
proceedings; or
(c) Counsel is necessary to proceed with
discovery.
2. If the court determines that the
petitioner is unable to pay all necessary costs and expenses incident to the
proceedings of the trial court and the reviewing court, including court costs,
stenographic services, printing and reasonable compensation for legal services,
all costs must be paid from money appropriated to the Department of Indigent
Defense Services for that purpose. After appropriations for that purpose are
exhausted, money must be allocated to the Department of Indigent Defense
Services from the Reserve for Statutory Contingency Account for the payment of
the costs, expenses and compensation.
3. After appointment by the court, counsel
for the petitioner may file and serve supplemental pleadings, exhibits,
transcripts and documents within 30 days after:
(a) The date the court orders the filing of a
response or answer; or
(b) The date of counsel’s appointment,
Ê whichever is
later. If it has not previously been filed, the response or answer by the
respondent must be filed within 15 days after receipt of the supplemental
pleadings and include any response to the supplemental pleadings.
4. The petitioner shall respond within 15
days after service to a motion by the State to dismiss the action.
5. No further pleadings may be filed
except as ordered by the court.
(Added to NRS by 1985,
1230; A 1987,
1218; 1991,
85, 1751,
1824;
2023,
1629; 2025,
1891)
Notes of Decisions
Bejarano v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, 929 P.2d 922 (Nev. 1996).
· cites it 4× “However, NRS 34.750, still in effect, also allows discretionary appointment of counsel to indigent petitioners for post-conviction relief.”
Pellegrini v. State, 34 P.3d 519 (Nev. 2001).
“44, §§ 31-33, at 92. NRS 34.820(1) now provides for mandatory appointment of counsel for the first post-conviction petition challenging the validity of conviction or sentence where the petitioner has been sentenced to death.”
Hathaway v. State, 71 P.3d 503 (Nev. 2003).
“Pursuant to NRS 34.750 and NRS 34.770, the district court declined to appoint post-conviction counsel or to conduct an evidentiary hearing.”
Ford v. Warden, 901 P.2d 123 (Nev. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Denial of Motion to Appoint Counsel NRS 34.750(1) provides: A petition may allege that the petitioner is unable to pay the costs of the proceedings or to employ counsel.”
Crump v. Warden, 934 P.2d 247 (Nev. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The September 1, 1989 order also stated that “[Crump] shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order to supplement the Petition in accordance with NRS 34.750.” On March 26, 1990, Crump filed a supplement to his petition alleging the following seventeen grounds of…”
Gibson v. Turpin, 513 S.E.2d 186 (Ga. 1999).
· cites it 2× “§ 29-3004 (Michie 1995) (subject to judicial discretion); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 34.750 (1) (Michie 1996) (subject to judicial discretion); N.”
Gebers v. State, 50 P.3d 1092 (Nev. 2002).
· cites it 3× “Pursuant to NRS 34.750, the district court declined to appoint counsel to represent Gebers.”
Toston v. State, 267 P.3d 795 (Nev. 2011).
“NRS 34.750(1). If the district court determines that Toston was deprived of a direct appeal due to ineffective assistance of counsel, the district court shall provide Toston with the remedy set forth in NRAP 4(c).”
State v. Powell, 138 P.3d 453 (Nev. 2006).
“” 15 In this case, we do not turn to the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure because two subsections of NRS 34.750 address “supplemental pleadings” and “further pleadings” in habeas proceedings: 3.”
Mann v. State, 46 P.3d 1228 (Nev. 2002).
“16 See NRS 34.750(1). 17 Because we conclude that an evidentiary hearing is necessary, we decline to reach the merits of any of the other claims that Mann raised in the instant petition.”
Chappell (james) v. State (death Penalty-pc), 2021 NV 83 (Nev. 2021).
· cites it 3× “Because such a petition would have been a wholly separate proceeding from the penalty phase retrial, Chappell could have filed the second petition pro se and requested the appointment of counsel under NRS 34.750. And any adverse impact a second postconviction petition might have…”
Barnhart v. State, 130 P.3d 650 (Nev. 2006).
“In sum, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying Barnhart’s petition and we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(1) — 87 cases
Pellegrini v. State, 34 P.3d 519 (Nev. 2001).
“44, §§ 31-33, at 92. NRS 34.820(1) now provides for mandatory appointment of counsel for the first post-conviction petition challenging the validity of conviction or sentence where the petitioner has been sentenced to death.”
Ford v. Warden, 901 P.2d 123 (Nev. 1995).
“Denial of Motion to Appoint Counsel NRS 34.750(1) provides: A petition may allege that the petitioner is unable to pay the costs of the proceedings or to employ counsel.”
Bejarano v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, 929 P.2d 922 (Nev. 1996).
“However, NRS 34.750, still in effect, also allows discretionary appointment of counsel to indigent petitioners for post-conviction relief.”
Toston v. State, 267 P.3d 795 (Nev. 2011).
“NRS 34.750(1). If the district court determines that Toston was deprived of a direct appeal due to ineffective assistance of counsel, the district court shall provide Toston with the remedy set forth in NRAP 4(c).”
Gibson v. Turpin, 513 S.E.2d 186 (Ga. 1999).
“§ 29-3004 (Michie 1995) (subject to judicial discretion); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 34.750 (1) (Michie 1996) (subject to judicial discretion); N.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(1)(c) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(2) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(3) — 11 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(5) — 16 cases
Barnhart v. State, 130 P.3d 650 (Nev. 2006).
“In sum, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying Barnhart’s petition and we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(I) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.750(e) — 1 case
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.