Harmful Error

This is the second post in a series of posts looking at proposed changes to the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Nevada Supreme Court will hear public comment on October 3 and welcomes written comments.

Previous posts on this topic:
Proposed changes to NRAP 1, 2 and 3.

NRAP 3A. Civil actions: Standing to Appeal; Appealable Determinations (page 7 of the pdf)
Subsection (a) old version:
Aggrieved Party May Appeal. Any appealable judgment or order in a civil action or proceeding may be appealed from and reviewed as prescribed by these rules, and not otherwise. Any party aggrieved may appeal, with or without first moving for a new trial, and the Supreme Court may consider errors of law and the sufficiency of the evidence, and may remand for new trial, whether or not a motion for a new trial has been made.
Subsection (a) new version:
A party who is aggrieved by an appealable judgment or order may appeal from that judgment or order, with or without first moving for a new trial.
Analysis:
I applaud the new version. It doesn't look like there's any substantive change and the new version is much cleaner.

Subsection (b)
The list of appealable orders is too long to retype here. The proposed amendments would change the style of the list of appealable orders and make the rule more readable.

Rule 3B. Criminal Actions: Rules Governing (page 9 of the pdf)
old version
Appeals from determinations of district courts in criminal actions shall be governed by the rules and by NRS 177.015 to 177.305. All appeals in capital cases are also subject to the provisions of S.C.R. 250. Rule 3C applies to all other direct and post-conviction criminal appeals, except those matters specifically excluded from the fast track by Rule 3C(a).
new version
Appeals from district-court determinations in criminal actions shall be governed by the rules and by NRS 177.015 to 177.305 and NRS 34.575. All appeals in capital cases are also subject to the provisions of SCR 250. Rule 3C applies to all other direct and post-conviction criminal appeals, except those matters specifically excluded from the fast track by Rule 3C(a).
Analysis
The clarification that this rule applies to habeas appeals is welcome.

Rule 3C. Fast Track Criminal Appeals (page 10 of the pdf)
Subsection (a):
Most of the changes are stylistic. The new rule would have a subsection (a)(C) which states that the fast track rule is not applicable to an appeal filed in accordance with Rule 4(c), which is a new rule that addresses Lozada appeals (untimely direct appeal from a judgment of conviction).

Subsection (b):
A definition of "trial counsel" would be added to the rule under the proposed amendments. "Trial counsel" means the attorney who represented the defendant or post-conviction petitioner in the underlying proceedings in district court that are the subject of the appeal. Other changes to this subsection are stylistic.

Subsection (c):
Stylistic changes only

Subsection (d):
This subsection concerns the rough draft transcripts. Subsection (d)(1), concerning the format of the transcripts, has stylistic changes, as does subsection (d)(2) which includes notification to the court reporter before trial.

Subsection (d)(3), concerning service of the requests for transcripts, includes primarily stylistic changes, but also includes a new requirement that if no transcript is requested, trial counsel shall file with the Supreme Court a certificate to that effect.

Subsection (d)(4) includes only stylistic changes.

Subsections (e) and (f) include primarily stylistic changes, but also include new provisions recognizing that a motion may be filed in accordance with Rule 32(a)(7)(C) to file a fast track statement and response in excess of 10 pages.

Subsection (g), which concerns supplemental fast track statements, contains stylistic changes.

Subsections (h) (i) (j) and (l) contain stylistic changes.

Subsection (m) contains primarily stylistic chnages, but also deletes the provision that compensation to court reporters includes the cost of an ASCII diskette.