Skip to main content

Johnson v. State

Citations

  • 148 P.3d 767
  • 122 Nev. 1344
  • 122 Nev. Adv. Rep. 113
  • 2006 Nev. LEXIS 146

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding, in a capital murder case, that the terms \boys\ or \kids\ were not inappropriate or prejudicial descriptions for the defendant's victims, who were 17 to 20 years old
  • concluding, in a capital murder case, that the terms “boys” or “kids” were not inappropriate or prejudicial descriptions for the defendant’s victims, who were 17 to 20 years old
  • noting that the scope of voir dire rests with the district court's discretion and its decisions are entitled to considerable deference
  • noting that this court reviews a district court's decision to admit evidence for an abuse of discretion
  • approving of \the district court promptly excus [ing] the jurors and admonish[ing] them\ after a disruption in the courtroom
  • \Evidence of character is admissible during a penalty hearing so long as it is relevant and the danger of unfair prejudice does not substantially outweigh its probative value.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hardesty, Rose, Becker, Gibbons, Parraguirre

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.