Nevada
Nevada Security Camera Laws: Installation Rules and Privacy Limits (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 8 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Nevada homeowners may install video-only security cameras on their own property without posting signs. Audio-capable cameras trigger one-party consent under NRS 200.650 for in-person conversations. Using a camera to capture images of another person's private areas without consent where they expect privacy, such as in a bathroom or locker room, is a crime under NRS 200.604.
Nevada does not have a comprehensive security camera statute. Instead, the legality of security cameras depends on where they are installed, whether they capture audio, and what they are pointed at. Video-only surveillance is broadly legal in public and semi-public spaces. Audio-capable cameras fall under NRS 200.650: you may record conversations you take part in, but secretly recording private conversations among other people, including someone's side of a phone call, can be a felony. Nevada's split consent framework applies a separate all-party rule to phone and wire communications themselves under NRS 200.620. NRS 200.620's text allows a call to be intercepted with one party's consent only when there is also an emergency in which getting a court order first is impractical, and a court must then ratify the interception. The Nevada Supreme Court has read the statute to require every party's consent to record a phone call: three of five justices did so in Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 114 Nev. 1176, 969 P.2d 938 (1998), and the full court restated the rule in Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 64 (2017).
This guide covers residential and commercial security camera rules, audio recording restrictions, prohibited locations, HOA and neighbor disputes, and special rules for casinos and gaming establishments.
Residential Security Cameras
What Homeowners Can Do
Nevada homeowners have broad rights to install security cameras on their own property. You can place cameras to monitor:

- Your front door, porch, and entryway
- Driveways and garages
- Backyards and side yards
- Interior common areas of your home
- Any area of your property you wish to monitor
There is no state law requiring you to post signs, notify visitors, or register your camera system with any government agency.
Restrictions for Residential Cameras
Even on your own property, security cameras must not:
- Record areas where others have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Knowingly capturing images of someone's naked or undergarment-clad private areas through a neighbor's bedroom or bathroom window, without consent, can violate NRS 200.604 and result in voyeurism charges.
- Capture audio of conversations you are not participating in. If your outdoor camera has a microphone that picks up neighbors' private conversations, the audio component may violate NRS 200.650 if you are not a participant in those conversations.
- Be positioned to harass or intimidate. While not addressed by a specific recording statute, a camera deliberately aimed at a neighbor's property to harass them could support a civil harassment claim.
Doorbell Cameras (Ring, Nest, Blink)
Smart doorbell cameras like Ring, Google Nest, and Blink are legal in Nevada. These devices typically record both video and audio of your front door area. The audio component is generally permissible because:
- Visitors who approach your door and speak to you are in a semi-public area with reduced privacy expectations
- When you communicate through the doorbell's two-way talk feature, you are a participant in the conversation (satisfying one-party consent under NRS 200.650)
However, if a doorbell camera captures audio of private conversations between others who are not interacting with you, the recording may raise issues under NRS 200.650.
Nanny Cameras and Indoor Surveillance
Hidden cameras inside your own home are legal for video-only recording of common areas. This includes nanny cameras to monitor childcare providers. However:
- Keep cameras out of bathrooms and other areas where the nanny or anyone else expects privacy; capturing a private-area image there without consent is a crime under NRS 200.604
- Audio recording requires compliance with NRS 200.650 (you must be a participant in the conversation, or the conversation must occur in a non-private setting)
- If the camera's microphone secretly records the nanny's private phone conversations, which you are not part of, that audio can violate NRS 200.650
Commercial Security Cameras

Where Businesses Can Install Cameras
Nevada businesses can install video security cameras in:
- Sales floors and retail areas
- Lobbies, reception areas, and waiting rooms
- Hallways and corridors
- Parking lots and garages
- Warehouse and storage areas
- Loading docks and shipping areas
- Cash register areas and point-of-sale locations
- Building exteriors and perimeters
Where Cameras Do Not Belong
Keep cameras out of locations where employees or customers have a reasonable expectation of privacy. NRS 200.604 makes it a crime to capture an image of a person's private area there, so a camera in these places carries serious criminal risk:
| Location to Avoid | Reason |
|---|---|
| Bathrooms and restrooms | Privacy expectation (NRS 200.604) |
| Locker rooms and changing areas | Privacy expectation (NRS 200.604) |
| Nursing and lactation rooms | Privacy expectation |
| Employee break rooms (context-dependent) | May have privacy expectation |
| Private offices with closed doors (context-dependent) | May have privacy expectation |
Under NRS 200.604, the crime is knowingly and intentionally capturing an image of another person's private area (naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast) without consent where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, or distributing such an image; placing or aiming a camera is not by itself the offense under that section. A violation is a gross misdemeanor for a first offense (up to 364 days jail, $2,000 fine) and a Category E felony for a second or later offense. A category E felony carries 1 to 4 years in state prison and a fine of up to $5,000, but the court must suspend the sentence and grant probation unless the person has two or more prior felony convictions, and probation can include up to 1 year in county jail (NRS 193.130, NRS 176A.100).
Signage Requirements
Nevada does not have a state law requiring businesses to post "security cameras in use" or "you are being recorded" signs. However, many businesses post signs for several practical reasons:
- Deterrence against theft and vandalism
- Reduced liability through customer notice
- Compliance with insurance requirements
- Best practices recommended by security consultants
Some local jurisdictions may have their own signage ordinances. Check with your city or county for any local requirements.
Audio on Business Security Cameras
Many modern security cameras include microphones for two-way communication or ambient audio recording. When a business security camera records audio:
- In-person conversations in the camera's range: If the business owner or employee is participating in the conversation, one-party consent under NRS 200.650 applies. If the camera records conversations the business is not part of, this may violate NRS 200.650.
- Phone calls captured by the microphone: If the camera's microphone secretly records someone's side of a private phone call that the business is not part of, the audio can violate NRS 200.650, a category D felony under NRS 200.690.
The safest practice for businesses is to disable audio recording on security cameras or clearly notify all people in the area that audio recording is in progress.
Casino Surveillance

Nevada Gaming Control Board Requirements
Nevada casinos operate extensive surveillance systems under regulations issued by the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB). NGC Regulation 5 and the Board's surveillance standards require casinos to maintain surveillance coverage of:
- Slot machines, table games, and card games
- Keno and bingo, race books, and sports pools
- The casino cage and vault
- Count rooms
- Security offices and any other room where casino security may detain a person
Casino surveillance systems must meet specific technical standards for image quality, coverage, and retention periods. The NGCB can inspect surveillance systems and footage at any time.
Patron Privacy in Casinos
Patrons entering a Nevada casino have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding video surveillance on the gaming floor, in restaurants, in hallways, and in other public areas. However:
- A casino camera in a hotel room, bathroom, or changing area that captures a person's private area without consent risks the same NRS 200.604 crime as any other camera, and secretly recording guests' private conversations can violate NRS 200.650
- Casino surveillance footage of patrons is not public record and is generally kept confidential
Audio Recording in Casinos
The surveillance standards make audio mandatory in one place. The casino surveillance system must be capable of monitoring and recording, in both audio and video, any casino security office or other room where casino security may detain a person, a notice must be posted saying the area is under video and audio surveillance, and any detention and questioning must be recorded (Standard 8). Outside those rooms, audio recording by a casino is subject to Nevada's recording consent laws.
HOA and Neighbor Disputes

Common Issues
Security camera disputes between neighbors are increasingly common. In Nevada, the most frequent issues include:
- Cameras aimed at neighbor's property: A camera that primarily monitors your own property but incidentally captures some of your neighbor's driveway or yard is generally legal. A camera used to capture images of a neighbor's naked or undergarment-clad body, for example through a bedroom or bathroom window, may violate NRS 200.604, and a camera deliberately aimed to surveil a neighbor may give rise to civil claims.
- Audio capture of neighbor conversations: If your security camera's microphone picks up your neighbor's private conversations, the audio may violate NRS 200.650.
- HOA restrictions: Many homeowners' associations in Nevada have rules about security camera placement, size, and visibility. HOA rules can be more restrictive than state law.
Legal Options for Disputes
If a neighbor's camera is invading your privacy:
- Talk to the neighbor and request a camera repositioning
- Contact your HOA if applicable
- File a police report if you believe the camera is capturing images of people's private areas in violation of NRS 200.604
- Consult an attorney about civil remedies including injunctions and damages
Security Camera Footage as Evidence
Admissibility in Nevada Courts
Security camera footage is generally admissible as evidence in Nevada courts if:
- The camera was operating lawfully (no private-area images captured in violation of NRS 200.604, no illegal audio)
- The footage can be authenticated as genuine and unaltered
- The footage is relevant to the case
- The footage was preserved in its original format
Preservation and Retention
Nevada has no general state law requiring specific retention periods for private security camera footage. However:
- Insurance companies may require minimum retention periods
- If you are involved in a legal dispute, you have a duty to preserve relevant footage once litigation is anticipated
- Law enforcement can request footage and may obtain a court order if you refuse
Smart Home Security Systems
Ring, Nest, Arlo, and Similar Systems
Cloud-connected security systems raise unique considerations in Nevada:
- Footage shared with law enforcement: Some platforms like Ring have partnerships with police departments. Since September 2025, Ring's Community Requests feature lets verified local agencies post requests for footage of an incident, and Ring owners can choose to share clips or ignore the request. Policies vary by platform and change often.
- Cloud storage and data privacy: Footage stored on company servers is subject to the platform's privacy policy and terms of service.
- Two-way audio: When you use a two-way talk feature to speak with someone at your door, you are a participant in the conversation, satisfying NRS 200.650's one-party consent requirement.
License Plate Reader Cameras
Some residential and commercial security systems include license plate recognition (LPR) cameras. Nevada does not have a state law specifically regulating private LPR cameras, and as of 2026 has no dedicated state statute governing government or law enforcement use of automated license plate readers either. Any rules on retention, sharing, or access to government-collected LPR data currently come from individual agency policy rather than a Nevada statute. Check with the specific city, county, or state agency operating a system for its retention and access policy.
Penalties Summary
| Violation | Classification | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Capturing an image of a person's private area without consent where privacy is expected, e.g., bathroom/locker room (NRS 200.604, first offense) | Gross misdemeanor | Up to 364 days jail, $2,000 fine |
| Same NRS 200.604 offense (subsequent) | Category E felony | 1-4 years prison, up to $5,000 fine; probation generally mandatory (NRS 193.130) |
| Camera secretly recording others' private conversation, including someone's side of a phone call (NRS 200.650) | Category D felony | 1-4 years prison, up to $5,000 fine |
| Distributing or publishing an image captured in violation of NRS 200.604 | Gross misdemeanor/felony | Varies by offense number |
More Nevada Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
More Nevada Recording Topics
See Also
- Nevada Surveillance Camera Laws covers home, HOA, neighbor, workplace, and landlord camera rules in Nevada.
More Nevada Laws
- Nevada AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Nevada Dashcam Laws
- Nevada Data Privacy Laws
- Nevada Deepfake Laws
- Nevada Employee Monitoring Laws
- Nevada GPS Tracking Laws
- Nevada Police Bodycam Laws
- Nevada Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need to post signs for security cameras in Nevada?
No. Nevada has no state law requiring homeowners or businesses to post signs for video-only security cameras. Many businesses post signs as a best practice for deterrence and liability, but it is not legally required. Some local jurisdictions or HOAs may have their own signage rules.
Can I put a security camera in my rental property in Nevada?
Landlords can install exterior security cameras and cameras in common areas of multi-unit buildings. Nevada has no statute that addresses landlord cameras inside a rented home as such, but a camera inside a tenant's unit without consent risks criminal charges if it captures the tenant's private areas (NRS 200.604) or records private conversations (NRS 200.650), and civil claims for invasion of privacy, so keep cameras to exterior and common areas. A hidden camera that captures images of a tenant's naked or undergarment-clad private areas without consent, such as in a bathroom or bedroom, violates NRS 200.604 and is a criminal offense.
Are security cameras with audio legal in Nevada?
Video-only cameras are broadly legal in non-private areas. When a camera records audio, Nevada's consent rules apply. In-person conversation audio follows one-party consent under NRS 200.650 (you must be a participant). Secretly recording other people's private conversations, including someone's side of a phone call, can violate NRS 200.650. The safest approach is to disable audio recording on security cameras.
Can my neighbor point a security camera at my house in Nevada?
A camera that incidentally captures some of your property while primarily monitoring the neighbor's own property is generally legal. A camera used to capture images of people's naked or undergarment-clad bodies through a bedroom or bathroom window without consent may violate NRS 200.604. You can ask the neighbor to reposition the camera or consult an attorney about civil remedies.
How long must casino surveillance footage be kept in Nevada?
Under the Nevada Gaming Control Board's surveillance standards (Regulation 5), casinos must keep video recordings of required surveillance coverage for at least 7 days, rising to 15 days on April 3, 2027. Recordings of detentions and questioning by casino security must be kept for at least 30 days. Casinos may keep footage longer under their own policies.
Updates
Reworded the nanny-camera, casino and admissibility points to say that Nevada's NRS 200.604 makes capturing a private-area image without consent a crime, rather than describing it as a ban on camera locations.
Corrected the casino detention-room rule (systems must be able to record audio and video, and detentions must be recorded), tied camera-microphone audio to NRS 200.650, and reworded a "prohibited locations" list that overstated NRS 200.604.
We corrected the repeat-offense sentence for NRS 200.604 (probation is generally mandatory for a category E felony), restated the Gaming Control Board surveillance standards (required coverage areas, mandatory audio and video in detention rooms, 7/15/30-day retention), tied camera audio of phone calls to NRS 200.650, replaced a flat landlord-camera rule with the actual legal exposure, updated Ring police-request information, and described NRS 200.620 and the Lane and Ditech decisions accurately.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected our description of NRS 200.604: the offense is knowingly capturing an image of another person's private area without consent where privacy is expected, not merely placing or aiming a camera.
Removed a fabricated license-plate-reader statute citation (NRS 238.640 does not exist; chapter 238 covers legal notices, not surveillance) and corrected the page to state honestly that Nevada has no state law on government or private license-plate-reader use, and replaced the dead Nevada Gaming Control Board regulation link with a live source.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 200: CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
§ 200.604Capturing image of private area of another person; distributing, disclosing, displaying, transmitting or publishing image of private area of another person; penalties; exceptions; confidentiality of image.In forcecited in 15 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, a person shall not knowingly and intentionally capture an image of the private area of another person: (a) Without the consent of the other person; and (b) Under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. 2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, a person shall not distribute, disclose, display, transmit or publish an image that the person knows or has reason to know was made in violation of subsection 1. 3. Unless a greater penalty is provided pursuant to NRS 200.780 or 212.188, a person who violates this section: (a) For a first offense, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (b) For a second or subsequent offense, is guilty of a category E felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130. 4. This section does not prohibit any lawful law enforcement or correctional activity, including, without limitation, capturing, distributing, disclosing, displaying, transmitting or publishing an image for the purpose of investigating or prosecuting a violation of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Coleman v. State (Nevada Supreme Court 2018, 416 P.3d 238)“…By the Court, PICKERING, J.: NRS 200.604 prohibits a person from knowingly and i…”
- COLEMAN (SOLOMON) VS. STATE (Nevada Supreme Court 2018, 2018 NV 28)“…y the Court, PICKERING, J.: NRS 200.604 prohibits a person from knowingly and…”
- Brian Olsen v. City of Henderson (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2016, 648 F. App'x 628)“…amily. Nichols reasonably believed that Olsen had violated Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.604 by capturing and publishing to his per…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nevada Smart Glasses Recording Laws 2026, Nevada Recording Laws (2026): All-Party for Calls, One-Party in Person, Nevada Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Rights for Renters and Property Owners (2026)
§ 200.620Interception and attempted interception of wire communication prohibited; exceptions.In forcecited in 38 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5 and NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, 209.419 and 704.195, it is unlawful for any person to intercept or attempt to intercept any wire communication unless: (a) The interception or attempted interception is made with the prior consent of one of the parties to the communication; and (b) An emergency situation exists and it is impractical to obtain a court order as required by NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, before the interception, in which event the interception is subject to the requirements of subsection 3. If the application for ratification is denied, any use or disclosure of the information so intercepted is unlawful, and the person who made the interception shall notify the sender and the receiver of the communication that: (1) The communication was intercepted; and (2) Upon application to the court, ratification of the interception was denied.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 18 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Nevada reads NRS 200.620 as an all-party consent rule for phone recording, with a territorial limit. Lane v. Allstate Insurance held a participant who taped his own calls without the other parties' consent violated it; DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES held it does not reach calls recorded from outside Nevada.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)✓A former employee secretly taped hundreds of his own phone calls with his ex-employer's staff to build his suit; the court held NRS 200.620 bars recording a call without every party's consent, so the tapes were excluded and the dismissal of his suit was reversed.
- State v. Reyes (Nevada Supreme Court 1991, 107 Nev. 191)✓Police had an interpreter listen on a station extension phone while an informant set up a drug buy; the court held that officers' use of regularly installed telephone equipment in the ordinary course of their duties is not an interception under NRS 200.620.
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…corded phone conversations in violation of NRS 200.620 to obtain evidence to support tort…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can You Record ICE Agents? Know Your Rights by State (2026), Is Plaud HIPAA Compliant? Kind Of. Here's What to Know (2026)
§ 200.650Unauthorized, surreptitious intrusion of privacy by listening device prohibited.In forcecited in 25 of our articles
Except as otherwise provided in NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, and 704.195, a person shall not intrude upon the privacy of other persons by surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording, or attempting to listen to, monitor or record, by means of any mechanical, electronic or other listening device, any private conversation engaged in by the other persons, or disclose the existence, content, substance, purport, effect or meaning of any conversation so listened to, monitored or recorded, unless authorized to do so by one of the persons engaging in the conversation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-26 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 13 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Nevada courts read NRS 200.650 to permit a recording authorized by a participant. Summers v. State (1986) upheld a body-wire recording because the informant taking part in the conversation authorized it. Abid v. Abid (2017) held the section carries no suppression rule, so a custody expert could consider recordings made in violation of it.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)✓A former employee secretly taped hundreds of phone calls with company personnel; the court read NRS 200.650 as allowing in-person private conversations to be recorded when one participant authorizes it, and contrasted that in holding NRS 200.620 bars one-party taping of calls.
- Summers v. State (Nevada Supreme Court 1986, 102 Nev. 195)✓Police taped a transmitter to an informant, who recorded his conversation with Summers about the murder guns; the court held such a recording needs no court order so long as the authorization requirement of NRS 200.650 is met, and the informant had authorized it.
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…to this recording, the father's actions likely violated NRS 200.650, which prohibits the…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Federal Wiretap Act and ECPA: The Complete Guide (2026), One-Party Consent States: Complete 2026 Guide, Nevada Audio Recording Laws: Split Consent Rules and Penalties (2026)
§ 200.690Penalties.In forcecited in 18 of our articles
1. A person who willfully and knowingly violates NRS 200.620 to 200.650, inclusive: (a) Shall be punished for a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130. (b) Is liable to a person whose wire or oral communication is intercepted without his or her consent for: (1) Actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000, whichever is greater; (2) Punitive damages; and (3) His or her costs reasonably incurred in the action, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, Ê all of which may be recovered by civil action. 2. A good faith reliance by a public utility on a written request for interception by one party to a conversation is a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought against the public utility on account of the interception.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)“…shable as “a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130.” NRS 200.690(l)(a). In addition, the violator is lia…”
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…regarding evidence and admissibility. See NRS 200.690(1) (enforcing NRS 200.650 exclusively…”
- DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 64)“…ons without Buckles's consent.' 1 NRS 200.690(1)(b) provides a private right of actio…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nevada Dashcam Laws: Legal Rules for Dashboard Cameras (2026), Nevada Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Healthcare Privacy (2026), Nevada Phone Call Recording Laws: All-Party Consent Required (2026)
Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 239: PUBLIC RECORDS
§ 239.010Public books and public records open to inspection; confidential information in public books and records; copyrighted books and records; copies to be prepared by governmental entity and provided in electronic format unless other medium requested.In forcecited in 5 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS 1.4683, 1.4687, 1A.110, 3.2203, 41.0397, 41.071, 49.095, 49.293, 62D.420, 62D.440, 62E.516, 62E.620, 62H.025, 62H.030, 62H.170, 62H.220, 62H.320, 75A.100, 75A.150, 76.160, 78.152, 80.113, 81.850, 82.183, 86.246, 86.54615, 87.515, 87.5413, 87A.200, 87A.580, 87A.640, 88.3355, 88.5927, 88.6067, 88A.345, 88A.7345, 89.045, 89.251, 90.703, 90.730, 91.160, 116.757, 116A.270, 116B.880, 118B.026, 119.260, 119.265, 119.267, 119.280, 119A.280, 119A.653, 119A.677, 119B.370, 119B.382, 120A.640, 120A.690, 125.130, 125B.140, 126.141, 126.161, 126.163, 126.730, 127A.160, 127A.230, 127B.370, 127B.750, 127C.420, 127C.870, 127E.120, 128.090, 130.312, 130.712, 136.050, 159.044, 159A.044, 164.041, 172.075, 172.245, 176.01334, 176.01385, 176.015, 176.0625, 176.09129, 176.156, 176A.630, 178.4715, 178.5691, 178.5717, 179.495, 179A.070, 179A.165, 179D.160, 180.600, 200.3771, 200.3772, 200.5095, 200.604, 202.3662, 205.4651, 209.392, 209.3923, 209.3925, 209.419, 209.429, 209.521, 211A.140, 213.010, 213.040, 213.095, 213.131, 217.105, 217.110, 217.464, 217.475, 218A.350, 218F.150, 218G.130, 218G.240, 218G.350, 218G.615, 223.250,…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-03 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 37 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Donrey of Nevada, Inc. v. Bradshaw (1990) held a police investigative report is a public record under NRS 239.010 where no statute declares it confidential, subject to a balancing of interests, and ordered it released. Reno Newspapers, Inc. v. Haley (2010) applied that framework to concealed firearms permit records.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- City of Reno v. Reno Gazette-Journal (Nevada Supreme Court 2003, 119 Nev. 55)✓A newspaper sought appraisal and relocation records for Reno's federally funded rail trench project; the court held a federal regulation adopted into Nevada law by NRS 342.105 makes them confidential, placing them within the NRS 239.010 exemption for records confidential by law.
- Reno Newspapers, Inc. v. Haley (Nevada Supreme Court 2010, 126 Nev. 211)✓A newspaper sought records on the suspension of the governor's concealed firearms permit; the court held NRS 202.3662 covers only the application and pre-issuance investigation, so the permittee's name and post-permit records are public under NRS 239.010, subject to redaction.
- Donrey of Nevada, Inc. v. Bradshaw (Nevada Supreme Court 1990, 106 Nev. 630)✓News outlets sought a police report on the dismissal of charges against Joe Conforte; the court held criminal investigative reports are not declared confidential by statute and, weighing open government against privacy and law enforcement, ordered the whole report released.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nevada Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights Under NRS 171.1233 (2026), Are Autopsy Reports Public in Nevada? (2026 Guide), Nevada Police Reports: How to Get a Crash Report, Incident Report, or Bodycam Video
Sources and References
- NRS 200.604 - Capturing Image of Private Area(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.620 - Interception of Wire Communications(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.650 - Surreptitious Intrusion of Privacy(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.690 - Penalties(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NGC Regulation 5 - Surveillance Standards for Licensees(gaming.nv.gov).gov
- NRS 239.010 - Public Records(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 64 (2017): NRS 200.620 bars recording a telephone call unless both parties consent; it does not reach calls recorded outside Nevada(courtlistener.com)
- NRS 193.130 - Categories and punishment of felonies (category E probation rule)(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 176A.100 - Probation eligibility for category E felonies(leg.state.nv.us).gov