Sheriff v. Lyons
This text of 607 P.2d 590 (Sheriff v. Lyons) 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.
Opinion
[299]*299OPINION
By way of information, respondent was charged with possession of a cheating device, a violation of NRS 465.080.1 Thereafter, respondent petitioned the district court for a pre-trial writ of habeas corpus on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to establish probable cause to bind respondent over for trial. The district court granted the petition and the State appeals therefrom.
At the preliminary examination a casino security agent testified that he observed respondent inserting what was later identified as a “spoon”, a device used for cheating, into a slot machine.
A criminal defendant may be bound over for trial if the evidence adduced is sufficient to establish probable cause that a crime has been committed and the defendant has committed it. State v. von Brincken, 86 Nev. 769, 476 P.2d 733 (1970). “The finding of probable cause may be based on slight, even ‘marginal’ evidence . . . .” Sheriff v. Hodes, 96 Nev. 184, 186, 606 P.2d 178, 180 (1980). The “spoon” possessed by respondent was clearly identified as a device used for cheating slot machines. Thus, we believe the State produced evidence sufficient to establish probable cause. See Graham v. State, 86 Nev. 290, 467 P.2d 1016 (1970).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
607 P.2d 590, 96 Nev. 298, 1980 Nev. LEXIS 574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheriff-v-lyons-nev-1980.