Archie v. Sheriff

Nevada Supreme Court

Archie v. Sheriff

591 P.2d 245, 95 Nev. 182, 1979 Nev. LEXIS 557

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 28, 1979

DocketNo. 11430

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 591 P.2d 245 (Archie v. Sheriff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Archie v. Sheriff, 591 P.2d 245, 95 Nev. 182, 1979 Nev. LEXIS 557 (Neb. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

[183]*183OPINION

Per Curiam:

This appeal is from an order denying a pretrial habeas corpus challenge to an information charging that Glenn Davis Archie committed a battery with a deadly weapon (NRS 200.481), and a robbery (NRS 200.380). There is testimony recorded in the transcript of the preliminary examination that, during an altercation, Archie struck the victim with a two-by-four piece of lumber. This testimony supports the district court’s determination, that Archie probably committed a battery with the use of a deadly weapon. Cf. Lindsay v. State, 64 So. 501 (Fla. 1914). However, the record is barren of any evidence that would support an inference that Archie either committed the alleged robbery or participated in a scheme to do so. See Skinner v. Sheriff, 93 Nev. 340, 566 P.2d 80 (1977). Therefore, the district court should have granted habeas on the robbery charge. Accordingly, the portion of the district court’s order which denied the habeas challenge to the robbery charge is reversed. The portion of the order which denied the habeas challenge to the battery charge is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[183]*183OPINION

Per Curiam:

This appeal is from an order denying a pretrial habeas corpus challenge to an information charging that Glenn Davis Archie committed a battery with a deadly weapon (NRS 200.481), and a robbery (NRS 200.380). There is testimony recorded in the transcript of the preliminary examination that, during an altercation, Archie struck the victim with a two-by-four piece of lumber. This testimony supports the district court’s determination, that Archie probably committed a battery with the use of a deadly weapon. Cf. Lindsay v. State, 64 So. 501 (Fla. 1914). However, the record is barren of any evidence that would support an inference that Archie either committed the alleged robbery or participated in a scheme to do so. See Skinner v. Sheriff, 93 Nev. 340, 566 P.2d 80 (1977). Therefore, the district court should have granted habeas on the robbery charge. Accordingly, the portion of the district court’s order which denied the habeas challenge to the robbery charge is reversed. The portion of the order which denied the habeas challenge to the battery charge is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

591 P.2d 245, 95 Nev. 182, 1979 Nev. LEXIS 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/archie-v-sheriff-nev-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack