Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 47.090 (2026)
Preliminary hearings on confessions and evidence
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 47.090 Preliminary hearings on confessions and evidence. Preliminary hearings on the admissibility of
confessions or statements by the accused or evidence allegedly unlawfully
obtained shall be conducted outside the hearing of the jury. The accused does
not by testifying at the hearing subject himself or herself to
cross-examination as to other issues in the case. Testimony given by the
accused at the hearing is not admissible against the accused on the issue of
guilt at the trial.
(Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2021 · leading case: Marvin v. State, 603 P.2d 1056 (Nev. 1979).
Marvin v. State, 603 P.2d 1056 (Nev. 1979). “See NRS 47.090, 174.125(1). 2. The Question of a "Full Investigation.”
Chao v. Neven (D. Nev. 2021). “19 Under NRS 47.090, testimony given by the accused at a preliminary hearing regarding the admissibility of statements by the accused or 20 evidence allegedly unlawfuIly obtained "is not admissible against [him] on 21 the issue of guilt at the trial.”
Cooper (kamesha) Vs. State, 2018 NV 52 (Nev. 2018). “SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 10 While some jurisdictions have opted to frame this remedy as a rule of immunity, we consider it a rule of admissibility, akin to the rule created in NRS 47.090, wherein testimony by a defendant at a suppression hearing "is not admissible…”
Cooper (kamesha) Vs. State, 2018 NV 52 (Nev. 2018). “SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 10 While some jurisdictions have opted to frame this remedy as a rule of immunity, we consider it a rule of admissibility, akin to the rule created in NRS 47.090, wherein testimony by a defendant at a suppression hearing "is not admissible…”
Cooper (kamesha) Vs. State, 2018 NV 52 (Nev. 2018). “SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 10 While some jurisdictions have opted to frame this remedy as a rule of immunity, we consider it a rule of admissibility, akin to the rule created in NRS 47.090, wherein testimony by a defendant at a suppression hearing "is not admissible…”
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.