Nevada’s death penalty is back in the spotlight after the Clark County District Attorney’s Office sought execution warrants for death-row inmates Donald William Sherman and Zane Michael Floyd. If the court grants the request and all legal obstacles are resolved, the Nevada Department of Corrections could be responsible for carrying out the executions during the week of September 14, 2026.
Understanding Execution Warrants and the DA’s Request
An execution warrant is a court-issued document that sets the legal framework and timing for carrying out a death sentence. It does not automatically mean that an execution will occur. Death-row inmates may continue to pursue direct appeals, post-conviction relief, clemency, and other legal challenges.
The DA’s effort to secure execution warrants focuses on two individuals: Sherman, who was sentenced to death in 1997, and Floyd, who was sentenced to death in 2000.
Nevada’s efforts to resume executions have faced legal, procedural, and logistical challenges, which could affect whether and when any execution occurs.
A 2026 Las Vegas Review-Journal report found that Clark County prosecutors have pursued the death penalty against at least 225 defendants over approximately two decades. The report stated that 20 defendants received death sentences and that nine remained on death row at the time of the analysis. It also reported that prosecutors pursued capital punishment in approximately 10 cases per year on average.
Nevada Has Not Carried Out an Execution Since 2006
Nevada’s most recent execution occurred on April 26, 2006, when the state executed Daryl Mack. Since capital punishment was reinstated in Nevada, the state has carried out 12 executions. The Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty reports that 11 of those prisoners gave up some or all of their available appeals.
The long gap since Nevada’s last execution does not reduce the seriousness of a capital case. It may, however, create additional legal and practical issues involving execution procedures, available drugs, constitutional claims, and the timing of execution warrants.
How Nevada Law Sets Execution Timing
Under the current statute, NRS 176.355, the designated execution week generally must fall within a set period after the judgment of death, typically described as no sooner than 60 days and no later than 90 days.
Recent Senate Bill 350 proposed lengthening the period between a death judgment and execution. Earlier versions proposed a 180- to 270-day period, while later reporting described an amended proposal of 120 to 180 days. That proposal, however, was ultimately not enacted.
When Can Nevada Impose the Death Penalty?
Nevada law allows a death sentence only in certain first-degree murder cases. To be eligible for capital punishment, a case must involve at least one statutory aggravating circumstance defined by statute.
The prosecution bears the burden of proving both the underlying first-degree murder and the existence of at least one aggravating circumstance. If the prosecution cannot establish a statutory aggravating circumstance, the case is not eligible for the death penalty.
Eligibility for the Death Penalty in Nevada
Not every first-degree murder conviction leads to a capital case. Once a defendant is convicted of first-degree murder, the case may proceed to a separate penalty phase if the prosecution has proven at least one statutory aggravating circumstance.
During the penalty phase, the jury must unanimously find the required aggravating circumstance or circumstances. The jury then weighs those aggravating factors against any mitigating evidence presented by the defense. A death sentence may be imposed only if the jury unanimously determines that the aggravating circumstances are not outweighed by the mitigating circumstances.
If the jury does not unanimously impose death, Nevada law provides other sentencing options, including life imprisonment with or without the possibility of parole.
Aggravating Circumstances in Nevada Murder Cases
Nevada law identifies the circumstances that can make a first-degree murder case eligible for capital punishment. These circumstances are limited and must be proven through the legal process.
Depending on the facts and the applicable version of Nevada law, examples of statutory aggravating circumstances may include:
- Multiple murder victims or multiple murder convictions in the same proceeding.
- A murder committed by a person already serving a sentence for imprisonment.
- A murder committed during the perpetration of certain serious felonies, including robbery, burglary, home invasion, first-degree kidnapping, or first-degree arson.
- A murder committed to avoid arrest or escape custody.
- A murder committed for financial gain.
- The killing of a peace officer or firefighter performing official duties, when the defendant knew or reasonably should have known the victim’s status.
- Murder involving torture or mutilation.
- The murder of a child under 14.
- A murder motivated by the victim’s actual or perceived race, religion, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
- Murder committed in connection with sexual penetration occurring immediately before, during, or after the killing.
The existence of an aggravating circumstance does not eliminate the defendant’s right to present mitigating evidence. It also does not require a jury to impose death.
Mitigating Circumstances and Alternative Sentences
Mitigating evidence is information that may support a sentence less severe than death. It can address the defendant’s background, mental state, personal history, role in the offense, or other circumstances surrounding the alleged conduct.
Depending on the evidence, mitigating circumstances may include:
- Serious mental illness or mental impairment.
- Intellectual disability or brain injury.
- A defendant’s young age at the time of the offense.
- Lack of a significant prior criminal record.
- Coercion, duress, or domination by another person.
- Trauma, abuse, neglect, or other significant personal history.
- A limited role in the offense.
- Evidence that may undermine the prosecution’s claims about the defendant’s intent or role in the killing.
The defense may present mitigating evidence during the penalty phase, including evidence that may reduce the defendant’s culpability or support a sentence other than death. The jury must weigh the aggravating and mitigating evidence before deciding whether a death sentence is appropriate.
Building a Defense in Nevada Capital Cases
Capital cases require a defense that addresses both the evidence supporting the charge and the factors that could affect sentencing. Defense counsel may investigate the facts, challenge the prosecution’s legal theories, protect the defendant’s constitutional rights, and present mitigating evidence in pursuit of the strongest possible outcome.
The Importance of Investigating the Evidence
Capital cases require a detailed investigation that may include:
- Crime-scene analysis
- Forensic testing
- Medical records
- Digital evidence
- Witness interviews
- Surveillance footage
- Review of the prosecution’s timeline
Defense counsel may also examine whether investigators overlooked alternative suspects, relied on mistaken identification or unreliable witnesses, used improper procedures, or misinterpreted important evidence.
Challenging Prosecution Claims and Aggravating Factors
The prosecution must prove more than the fact that a death occurred. It must establish the elements of the charged homicide offense and, in a capital case, prove the aggravating circumstances required for death eligibility.
A defense may challenge whether the evidence establishes premeditation, intent, causation, participation, or the alleged aggravating factor. Even if a case proceeds to a penalty hearing, the defense may challenge the prosecution’s evidence and the alleged aggravating circumstances.
Protecting Constitutional and Procedural Rights
The Constitution provides important protections in serious criminal cases. These may include the right to remain silent, the right to counsel, the right to a fair and impartial jury, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to receive legally adequate representation.
Wrongful convictions demonstrate why these safeguards matter.
The Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty identifies Nevada cases that illustrate the importance of post-conviction review. For example, Roberto Miranda was exonerated after spending 14 years on death row.
Nationally, the Death Penalty Information Center reports that at least 202 people who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death have been exonerated in the United States since 1973, approximately one exoneration for every eight executions.
These cases do not establish that every capital defendant is innocent. They do, however, illustrate the serious consequences that can result when a case involves unreliable evidence, inadequate representation, prosecutorial misconduct, or other legal errors.
Pursuing Reduced Charges or Alternative Sentences
A defense strategy may involve seeking dismissal, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, negotiating reduced charges, or presenting evidence that supports a non-capital sentence.
In other cases, the defense may focus on disproving aggravating circumstances, presenting mitigating evidence, or arguing that life imprisonment is more appropriate than execution. The appropriate strategy depends on the evidence, the charges, the defendant’s history, and the specific circumstances of the alleged offense.
Facing a Serious Charge in Las Vegas? Contact Miley Law Firm
A murder, homicide, or other serious felony accusation can threaten a person’s freedom and future. Because statements and other evidence gathered during an investigation can significantly affect the case, anyone facing an investigation or charge should consider speaking with a criminal defense attorney before answering questions or making important decisions.
If you or someone you love is facing a murder, homicide, or other serious felony charge in Las Vegas, contact Miley Law Firm’s criminal defense team to discuss your legal options.
