• Passed a bill in May 2003, exempt­ing the men­tal­ly retard­ed from the death penal­ty in which retar­da­tion, described as ​“sig­nif­i­cant­ly sub­av­er­age gen­er­al intel­lec­tu­al func­tion­ing,” will be deter­mined before the tri­al. For more infor­ma­tion regard­ing this leg­is­la­tion, Click Here.
  • Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn signed into law four pieces of leg­is­la­tion regard­ing the death penalty:
    • Assembly Bill 17 increased pay for lawyers who defend death penal­ty cas­es. (Signed May 12)
    • Assembly Bill 15 out­lawed the death penal­ty for the men­tal­ly retard­ed. (Signed May 21)
    • Assembly Bill 13 elim­i­nat­ed the three-judge pan­el for­mer­ly used for sen­tenc­ing in cap­i­tal cas­es when there were hung juries, guilty pleas, or bench tri­als. If the jury dead­locks on sen­tenc­ing, the judge decides whether to empan­el a new jury or impose a life sen­tence. (Signed June 9) (See DPIC’s page on Ring v. Arizona.)
    • Assembly Bill 16 allows DNA test­ing to be used as evi­dence on appeal in cas­es tried pri­or to the devel­op­ment of DNA test­ing. (Signed June 9) 
  • Two oth­er pieces of death penal­ty leg­is­la­tion were defeat­ed in the Senate Judiciary Committee: Assembly Bill 14, which would have giv­en defense lawyers the final argu­ment at tri­al and would have added men­tal ill­ness as a mit­i­gat­ing cir­cum­stance in cap­i­tal cas­es, and Assembly Bill 118, which would have pro­hib­it­ed the death penal­ty for minors. (Source: Reno Gazette-Journal, June 23, 2003)
  • The Nevada Assembly’s Subcommittee to Study the Death Penalty and DNA Testing recent­ly made a series of rec­om­men­da­tions to reform Nevada’s death penal­ty poli­cies. Among the reforms sup­port­ed by the panel are:
    • end­ing the prac­tice of exe­cut­ing those with mental retardation
    • dis­con­tin­u­ing the use of a three-judge pan­el in cap­i­tal cas­es where there is a hung jury, and replace the cur­rent pol­i­cy with an auto­mat­ic sen­tence of life with­out parole or a new jury
    • improv­ing DNA test­ing in capital cases
    • reduc­ing the num­ber aggra­vat­ing fac­tors that pros­e­cu­tors can bring up dur­ing cap­i­tal tri­als and increas­ing the num­ber of mit­i­gat­ing fac­tors that defense attor­neys can use to defend clients fac­ing a death sentence
    • urg­ing the state Supreme court to take steps to ensure prop­er legal rep­re­sen­ta­tion for defen­dants in cap­i­tal cas­es and to pro­vide judges with con­tin­u­ing edu­ca­tion on how to han­dle these cases
    • con­duct­ing a study to deter­mine the costs to local and state gov­ern­ment to main­tain the death penal­ty. (Associated Press, June 14, 2002). 
  • An eight mem­ber com­mit­tee was recent­ly appoint­ed to study Nevada’s death penal­ty before the 2003 Legislative ses­sion opens. Headed by Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, a death penal­ty oppo­nent, the group was formed by the Legislative Commission. A study of the death penal­ty was ordered after a bill was intro­duced last ses­sion to abol­ish cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. (Las Vegas Sun, 9/​7/​01)