Legal Opinion

Tavares v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided September 17, 2001No. 35909PublishedCited by 77 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

SUMMARY

In this case, we consider whether the failure to instruct the jury on the limited purposes for which uncharged bad act evidence is admitted constitutes plain error. Under the circumstances presented here, we conclude that it does. Moreover, we conclude that, subject to the defendant’s objection, the prosecutor shall henceforth have the burden of requesting that a limiting instruction be given both at the time the prosecutor introduces the evidence and in the final charge to the jury. As a result, we will review future cases involving the failure to request a limiting instruction…

3Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  5. Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by77 opinions

  1. State v. RodriguezTennessee Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Valdez v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2008
  3. McLellan v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Rosky v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Carter v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2005

72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API