Amendment No. 290

Senate Amendment to Senate Bill No. 400 (BDR 14-1533)

Proposed by: Committee on Judiciary

Amendment Box:

Resolves Conflicts with: N/A

Amends: Summary: Title: Preamble: Joint Sponsorship:

ASSEMBLY ACTION Initial and Date | SENATE ACTION Initial and Date

Adopted Lost | Adopted Lost

Concurred In Not | Concurred In Not

Receded Not | Receded Not

Amend the bill as a whole by adding a preamble, immediately preceding the enacting clause, to read as follows:

"Whereas, NRS 175.211 currently provides for an instruction to the jury that defines and explains reasonable doubt in criminal actions; and

Whereas, The supreme court of Nevada has repeatedly held that the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 is constitutional in its current form; and

Whereas, The Nevada legislature continues to believe that the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 is constitutional in its current form and that the instruction does not need to be revised based upon any principles of constitutional law; and

Whereas, The Nevada legislature declares that the provisions of this bill must not be construed to support a finding that the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 is unconstitutional in its current form; and

Whereas, The Nevada legislature continues to believe that the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 adequately defines and explains reasonable doubt in criminal actions; and

Whereas, The Nevada legislature recognizes, however, that the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 is based upon statutory language that was drafted in 1889; and

Whereas, Members of the judiciary and the State Bar of Nevada have encouraged the use of more contemporary language in the instruction contained in NRS 175.211; and

Whereas, The supreme court of Nevada, in Bollinger v. State, 111 Nev. 1110, 1115 n.2 (1995), encouraged the Nevada legislature to adopt the definition and explanation of reasonable doubt endorsed by the Federal Judicial Center; and

Whereas, In a concurring opinion in Victor v. Nebraska, 511 U.S. 1, 27 (1994), Justice Ginsburg of the United States Supreme Court opined that the instruction endorsed by the Federal Judicial Center stated "the reasonable doubt standard succinctly and comprehensibly"; and

Whereas, The Nevada legislature believes that the use of more contemporary language in the instruction contained in NRS 175.211 would further enhance the administration of justice in this state; now, therefore,".