Nevada District Courts Writ Authority Question 2 (1992)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Nevada District Courts Writ Authority Question, also known as Question 2, was a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment on the November 3, 1992 election ballot in Nevada, where it was approved.

Election results

Question 2 (District Courts Writ Authority)
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 279,273 60.4%
No182,85439.6%

Official results via: Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau - Research Division

Text of measure

The language that appeared on the ballot:

Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended to clarify the authority of District Courts to issue writs of prohibition and to authorize District Courts to issue writs of habeas corpus on behalf of persons who have been convicted of crimes within their respective jurisdictions but who have not completed their sentences?[1]

The language that appeared in the voter's guide:

EXPLANATION
The Nevada Constitution currently authorizes a judge of a District Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person who is held in custody in his judicial district. A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the legality of a person's confinement, but not his guilt or innocence. The proposed amendment would expand the jurisdiction of the District Courts to issue a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person who has been convicted of a crime in his judicial district, but who has not completed his sentence. In addition, the Nevada Constitution authorizes the District Courts to issue such writs as are proper and necessary to the complete exercise of their jurisdiction. The proposed amendment to the Nevada Constitution includes a technical provision that would clarify that such writs include a writ of prohibition, which prohibits a lower court from hearing an action over which it has no jurisdiction or from exceeding its authority in a matter over which it has jurisdiction. A "Yes" vote is a vote to amend the Nevada Constitution to clarify and extend the jurisdiction of the District Courts relating to writs of prohibition and habeas corpus. A "No" vote is a vote to disapprove the constitutional amendment.
FISCAL NOTE
Financial Impact-No. The proposal to amend the Nevada Constitution would change the authority of District Courts. The proposal would have no adverse fiscal impact, and may result in savings to the state.[1]

See also

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

External links

References