Ramos v. State

Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary

The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's conviction for the sexual assault of a woman who was killed twelve years before Defendant was charged, holding that there was no statutory time limit in which the State was required to file the sexual assault charge, and the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to dismiss.

In 1998, two elderly victims were murdered in a retirement facility. In 2010, the State charged Defendant with murdering both victims and sexually assaulting the female victim. Defendant moved to dismiss the sexual assault charge, arguing that the State's prosecution was time-barred. The district court denied the motion, concluding that there was no limitations period for the offense under Nev. Rev. Stat. 171.083. Defendant was subsequently convicted of the murder of both victims and the sexual assault of the female victim. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the requirements of section 171.083 were satisfied, and therefore, there was no statutory time limit in which the State was required to file the sexual assault charge; and (2) the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to dismiss.

Primary Holding

The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's sexual assault conviction, holding that there was no statutory time limit in which the State was required to file the sexual assault charge, and the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to dismiss.


Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.