Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Sentencing Sex Offenses topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nevada AG seeks to classify certain crimes against children and people with mental illness as "violent or sexual" offenses
Summary
Attorney General Aaron Ford and prosecutors told the Assembly Judiciary Committee that Assembly Bill 34 would add several child‑ and vulnerability‑focused offenses to Nevada's list of violent or sexual offenses, limiting courts' ability to defer judgment and allowing longer probation when monitoring is needed.
Assembly Attorney General Aaron Ford on behalf of the state presented Assembly Bill 34 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee, saying the measure would add several offenses involving children and people with mental illness to Nevada's statutory list of violent or sexual offenses and expand court monitoring options.
The bill, Ford said, "is sound policy that will aid prosecutors in bringing violent and sexual offenders to justice, as well as help victims know that they can be safe from being revictimized in the future." He asked the committee to consider additions to the list of crimes that currently preclude deferred judgments.
AB 34 adds specific statutory references to the list under NRS 202.876. Chief Deputy Attorney General Alyssa Engler told the committee that the bill would incorporate NRS 200.727 and NRS 200.73 (offenses related to visual presentations depicting sexual conduct involving a person 16 years of age), NRS 201.540 and NRS 201.550 (sexual conduct between certain school/college employees or volunteers and pupils or students), and NRS 201.56 (luring a child or a person with mental illness). Engler said those additions are Category B or C felonies under current law and that placing them in the NRS 202.876 list would bar courts from deferring judgment under NRS 176.211 for persons convicted of those offenses.
The measure also would permit courts to extend probation terms for the added offenses to a period "not to exceed 60 months," providing parole and probation more time to monitor defendants and allowing longer no‑contact orders and completion time for offender treatment. Engler said the goal is not to remove judicial discretion entirely; subsection language in the bill would still allow a court to grant an early discharge if persuaded by a defense motion.
During committee questions, Assemblymember LaRue Hatch raised whether AB 34 would capture adult offenders who victimize children outside school settings (for example, coaches or clergy). Engler and other AG staff replied that the bill's inclusion of the luring statute and existing provisions under the violent/sexual offense list would encompass conduct by nonschool adults who lure or exploit children.
Assemblymember Gray asked why the bill singles out school employees if other group leaders could be offenders; AG staff said the school provisions were previously debated, memorialize particularly disturbing behaviors identified by local prosecutors and investigators, and are being added so courts have the statutory authority to extend monitoring in those cases.
Supporters who testified included Jennifer Noble of the Nevada District Attorneys Association and Jason Walker representing the Washington County Sheriff's Office and the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association. No callers registered opposition; no neutral testimony was recorded in the hearing transcript.
The committee closed the hearing on AB 34 after staff and proponents took questions and public testimony.
The measure as presented would change who may receive a deferred judgment and the maximum probation period for listed offenses; it would also require certain reporting duties and allow longer court supervision for the added offenses.
