Skip to main content

Wilson v. State

Citations

  • 114 P.3d 285
  • 121 Nev. 345
  • 121 Nev. Adv. Rep. 34
  • 2005 Nev. LEXIS 35

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that the State is not required to allege an exact date unless time is an element of the charge provided that the defendant is given sufficient notice of the charges
  • recognizing that the State is not required to allege an exact date unless time is an element of the charge provided that the defendant is given sufficient notice of the charges
  • holding right to compulsory process is not absolute and is subject to procedural requirements and reviewing district court's decision for abuse of discretion
  • stating that a statute should be interpreted to avoid absurd results
  • holding that “there is no requirement that the 5 State allege exact dates unless the situation is one in which time is an element of the 6 crime charged. Instead, the State may provide approximate dates on which it is believed 7 that the crime occurred”
  • construing NRS 200.710(2) to authorize one conviction for the use of a minor in a sexual performance, not multiple, per-photograph convictions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rose, Gibbons, Hardesty

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite 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.