Nika v. State
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*1276OPINION
By the Court,
Hardesty, J.:
The primary issue in this appeal concerns a jury instruction defining premeditation, commonly referred to as the Kazalyn1 instruction, and our decision in Byford v. State,2 which addressed specific concerns about that instruction. Appellant Avram Nika challenges our subsequent decisions that Byford announced a new rule with prospective affect.3 In considering his argument, we reexamine whether our decision in Byford constituted a clarification of existing law or a change in the law respecting the meaning of the mens rea for first-degree murder. We hold that…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Griffith v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Mills v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by85 opinions
- Luurtsema v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
- State v. RosSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2009
- Berry v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2009
- Polk v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2010
- Babb v. LozowskyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.