Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 51.069 (2026)

Credibility of declarant

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 51.069  Credibility of declarant.

      1.  When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked or supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness.

      2.  Evidence of a statement or conduct by the declarant at any time, which is inconsistent with the declarant’s hearsay statement, is not subject to any requirement that the declarant must have been afforded an opportunity to deny or explain.

      3.  If the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the witness on that statement as if the witness were under cross-examination.

      (Added to NRS by 1971, 798; A 1979, 25)

EXCEPTIONS

Availability of Declarant Immaterial

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2019 · leading case: Byford v. State, 994 P.2d 700 (Nev. 2000).
Byford v. State, 994 P.2d 700 (Nev. 2000). · cites it 4× “The State also argues the evidence was admissible based on NRS 51.069(1), which provides: "When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked or supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the…”
Holmes (Rickie) v. State (Nev. 2017). · cites it 2× “NRS 51.069(1) provides that "[w]hen a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked or supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness.”
Indico (Elinor) Vs. State (Nev. 2019). “" NRS 51.069(1). Therefore, the district court did not err by ruling that introducing hearsay statements, here the 9-1-1 call, would permit the State to impeach those statements, if inconsistent.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 51.069(1) — 3 cases
Byford v. State, 994 P.2d 700 (Nev. 2000). “The State also argues the evidence was admissible based on NRS 51.069(1), which provides: "When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked or supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the…”
Holmes (Rickie) v. State (Nev. 2017). “NRS 51.069(1) provides that "[w]hen a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked or supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness.”
Indico (Elinor) Vs. State (Nev. 2019). “" NRS 51.069(1). Therefore, the district court did not err by ruling that introducing hearsay statements, here the 9-1-1 call, would permit the State to impeach those statements, if inconsistent.”
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.