Skip to main content

McConnell v. State

Citations

  • 107 P.3d 1287
  • 121 Nev. 25
  • 121 Nev. Adv. Rep. 5
  • 2005 Nev. LEXIS 5

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that “although NRS 50.065 differs from FRE 606(b) in its phrasing, Meyer . . . does not consider the differences significant”
  • a copy of 2 the opinion is found in the record at ECF No. 25-4
  • “We hold that the period of ‘direct review’ in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.