Document Type

Case Summary

Publication Date

8-22-2024

Case Synopsis

The court held that a challenge under NRS 172.145(2) should be brought through a motion and not a pre-trial habeas corpus petition. Using methods of statutory interpretation, the court found that for issues involving a grand jury, a party should only use pre-trial habeas petitions to challenge insufficiency of the evidence to reach a grand jury indictment. Any other challenges require a motion. A challenge under NRS. 172.145(2), as in this case, claims that the prosecutor did not provide all exculpatory evidence to a grand jury as required. This does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, but instead makes a claim as to the fairness of the grand jury proceedings. Therefore, challenges under NRS 172.145(2) should come to the court through a motion.

Download

Share

COinS