Nev. Rev. Stat. § 47.220
This is the official text of Nev. Rev. Stat. § 47.220, part of Nevada’s Rev. Stat — part of the compiled statutory law of Nevada, published by the state as "Rev. Stat." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Determination on evidence of presumed fact: Where basic facts doubtful
Official statutory text
When reasonable minds would not necessarily agree as to whether the evidence renders the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, and direct evidence is introduced concerning the existence of the presumed fact, the question of the existence of the presumed fact is determined as follows:
1. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the existence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact.
2. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact.
3. If reasonable minds would not necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact if they find from the evidence that the existence of the basic facts is more probable than not and unless they find the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, otherwise to find against the existence of the presumed fact.
1. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the existence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact.
2. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact.
3. If reasonable minds would not necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact if they find from the evidence that the existence of the basic facts is more probable than not and unless they find the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, otherwise to find against the existence of the presumed fact.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in Nevada?
Find a Nevada lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.