Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty: An Analysis of the United States\u27 Judicial System

Racial discrimination plays a role in the administration of the death penalty. This research analyzes the history, and past scholarly research, of the death penalty. The purpose of this research is to understand the correlation between racial discrimination and those sentenced to death. This study includes a literature review regarding the different aspects of the death penalty and race. Following the literature review, an analysis is performed of both previous literature and current death penalty statistics that augments the discussion of the death penalty

Dekker/Perich/ Sabatini LTD. et. al. v. Dist. Court & City of N. Las Vegas, 137 Nev. Adv. Op. 53 (Sep. 23, 2021) .

In this case, the City of North Las Vegas’s complaint against the Appellee was not time-barred, did not violate the Appellee’s due process rights, and was not void ab initio. Therefore, the Court denied the Appellee’s petition for writ relief. The 2019 amendment of NRS 11.202 extending the repose period from six-years to ten years applies retroactively to actions where substantial completion of the construction project occurred before October 1, 2019. The Legislature intended for the amendment to apply retroactively because the six-year repose period prejudiced Nevadans pursuing construction defect claims

McNair Research Journal - Summer 2015

Journal articles based on research conducted by undergraduate students in the McNair Scholars Program Table of Contents Biography of Dr. Ronald E. McNair Statements: Dr. Neal J. Smatresk, UNLV President Dr. Juanita P. Fain, Vice President of Student Affairs Dr. William W. Sullivan, Associate Vice President for Retention and Outreach Mr. Keith Rogers, Deputy Executive Director of the Center for Academic Enrichment and Outreach McNair Scholars Institute Staf

Daniel Lakes v. U.S. Bank Trust, 137 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Dec. 30, 2021)

No issue of material fact exists in this case because the undisputed evidence confirms that the first deed-of-trust beneficiary protected its interest in the property when it tendered the superpriority part of the Home Owners’ Association’s lien prior to the foreclosure sale. The Court was not persuaded by the appellant’s argument that the respondent cannot enforce its first-priority interest since the appellant recorded his grant, bargain, and sale deed prior to the respondent recorded its assignment as first deed-of-trust beneficiary. The appellant bought interest in property subject to the first deed-of trust lien that was recorded years before his purchase. Therefore, the appellant recording his deed prior to respondent’s recording of the assignment does not influence the respondent’s right to enforce its lien since the assignment did not change the appellant’s subordinate interest. The Court affirmed the district court’s ruling quieting title in respondent’s favor

Daniel Lakes v. U.S. Bank Trust, 137 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Dec. 30, 2021)

No issue of material fact exists in this case because the undisputed evidence confirms that the first deed-of-trust beneficiary protected its interest in the property when it tendered the superpriority part of the Home Owners’ Association’s lien prior to the foreclosure sale. The Court was not persuaded by the appellant’s argument that the respondent cannot enforce its first-priority interest since the appellant recorded his grant, bargain, and sale deed prior to the respondent recorded its assignment as first deed-of-trust beneficiary. The appellant bought interest in property subject to the first deed-of trust lien that was recorded years before his purchase. Therefore, the appellant recording his deed prior to respondent’s recording of the assignment does not influence the respondent’s right to enforce its lien since the assignment did not change the appellant’s subordinate interest. The Court affirmed the district court’s ruling quieting title in respondent’s favor

Dekker/Perich/ Sabatini LTD. et. al. v. Dist. Court & City of N. Las Vegas, 137 Nev. Adv. Op. 53 (Sep. 23, 2021) .

In this case, the City of North Las Vegas’s complaint against the Appellee was not time-barred, did not violate the Appellee’s due process rights, and was not void ab initio. Therefore, the Court denied the Appellee’s petition for writ relief. The 2019 amendment of NRS 11.202 extending the repose period from six-years to ten years applies retroactively to actions where substantial completion of the construction project occurred before October 1, 2019. The Legislature intended for the amendment to apply retroactively because the six-year repose period prejudiced Nevadans pursuing construction defect claims