Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.095

Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 50.095 Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime.

1. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime is admissible but only if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment for more than 1 year under the law under which the witness was convicted.

2. Evidence of a conviction is inadmissible under this section if a period of more than 10 years has elapsed since:

(a) The date of the release of the witness from confinement; or

(b) The expiration of the period of the witness’s parole, probation or sentence, whichever is the later date.

3. Evidence of a conviction is inadmissible under this section if the conviction has been the subject of a pardon.

4. Evidence of juvenile adjudications is inadmissible under this section.

5. The pendency of an appeal therefrom does not render evidence of a conviction inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of an appeal is admissible.

6. A certified copy of a conviction is prima facie evidence of the conviction.

(Added to NRS by 1971, 789; A 1981, 1646)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 55 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: Pineda v. State

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pineda v. State (2004) nev · cites it 14× “[16] Going further, we have held that NRS 50.095 imposes no requirement that such impeachment should be limited to only those felonies directly relevant to truthfulness or veracity.”

Warren v. State (2005) nev · cites it 10× “The decision of whether to admit a prior conviction for impeachment purposes under NRS 50.095 is within the discretion of the district court, and we will not disturb the decision absent an abuse of discretion.”

Byford v. State (2000) nev · cites it 4× “The State first argues that it was admissible under NRS 50.095(1), which provides that a witness's felony conviction is admissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of the witness.”

Yates v. State (1979) nev · cites it 10× “Appellant next contends that his motions in limine to exclude, for purposes of impeaching his testimony, evidence of his 1969 robbery conviction and his 1977 larceny conviction, both felonies, were improperly denied. He alleges the trial court's denial of his motions prompted…”

Williams v. State (2005) nev · cites it 4× “Prior juvenile felony conviction Williams challenges the order of the district court admitting under NRS 50.095 his prior felony conviction for aggravated robbery because it was committed when he was a juvenile.”

Crawford v. State (1991) nev · cites it 8× “NRS 50.095. Moreover, "a certified copy of a conviction is prima facie evidence of the conviction.”

Butler v. State (2004) nev · cites it 2× “The State acknowledges that NRS 50.095 did not authorize cross-examining Wilson on her prior gross misdemeanor conviction.”

Hubbard v. State (2018) nev · cites it 2× “2 (1979) (discussing the difference between felony convictions used for impeachment under NRS 50.095 and prior bad acts relevant to some purpose other than character under NRS 48.”

Cutler v. State (1977) nev · cites it 3× “2d 196 (1975), said: “It is true that NRS 50.095, subsection 4, provides that evidence of juvenile adjudications is not admissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness.”

Colgain v. State (1986) nev · cites it 5× “On appeal, Colgain contends that the court erred in: (1) refusing to grant a continuance in order to allow Colgain the opportunity to subpoena witnesses; (2) allowing impeachment by use of a prior felony conviction contrary to NRS 50.095; (3) allowing the State to amend the…”

Lobato v. State (2004) nev “8 NRS 50.095(1) states: For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime is admissible but only if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment for more than 1 year under the law under which he was convicted.”

Stephanie Olson v. Jeff Little (2015) ca6 “609(a); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 50.095. Two states allow for prior felony convictions and convictions for crimes of moral turpitude.”

Show all 55 citing cases →

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.095(1) — 15 cases

Pineda v. State (2004) nev “[16] Going further, we have held that NRS 50.095 imposes no requirement that such impeachment should be limited to only those felonies directly relevant to truthfulness or veracity.”

Byford v. State (2000) nev “The State first argues that it was admissible under NRS 50.095(1), which provides that a witness's felony conviction is admissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of the witness.”

Warren v. State (2005) nev “The decision of whether to admit a prior conviction for impeachment purposes under NRS 50.095 is within the discretion of the district court, and we will not disturb the decision absent an abuse of discretion.”

Hubbard v. State (2018) nev “2 (1979) (discussing the difference between felony convictions used for impeachment under NRS 50.095 and prior bad acts relevant to some purpose other than character under NRS 48.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.095(2) — 2 cases

Yates v. State (1979) nev “Appellant next contends that his motions in limine to exclude, for purposes of impeaching his testimony, evidence of his 1969 robbery conviction and his 1977 larceny conviction, both felonies, were improperly denied. He alleges the trial court's denial of his motions prompted…”

Crawford v. State (1991) nev “NRS 50.095. Moreover, "a certified copy of a conviction is prima facie evidence of the conviction.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.095(4) — 3 cases

Williams v. State (2005) nev “Prior juvenile felony conviction Williams challenges the order of the district court admitting under NRS 50.095 his prior felony conviction for aggravated robbery because it was committed when he was a juvenile.”

Cutler v. State (1977) nev “2d 196 (1975), said: “It is true that NRS 50.095, subsection 4, provides that evidence of juvenile adjudications is not admissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness.”

Pickard v. State (1978) nev

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.095(6) — 1 case

Yllas v. State (1996) nev

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.