If you’re going to take the law into your own hands, you should probably make sure that, at the bare minimum, you understand the statutes you intend to enforce. Otherwise, your attempt at being Batman might end up with you in a Batcave that features steel bars.
On November 20, 2025, the Nevada Supreme Court upheld a state court’s decision that Georgio Mont Ser’s attempt at a citizen’s arrest — well, his second concerted attempt — ended with him being much more of a criminal than those he was seeking to imprison. The court affirmed the ruling because Ser’s attempted arrest as a private person was for a federal felony criminal offense, and thus not covered under Nevada state statutes. They also ruled that the district court did not owe the jury sua sponte instructions, and that by not requesting them himself, Ser forfeited the right to appeal.
Also, Ser engaged in a lot of criminal acts in his attempts to address public safety by making an arrest for alleged criminal activity. And when we say a lot, we mean A LOT. His failure in appellate court means he’ll have more time to study criminal law and hopefully learn from his mistakes.
Probable What? Due What?
Members of law enforcement agencies undergo lengthy training to learn how to uphold the law. A peace officer is expected to understand how due process works, the need for probable cause or a search warrant to protect a citizen’s rights under the Fourth Amendment, and their proper role in the criminal justice system. They understand that any deviation by police officers in securing an arrest warrant or otherwise tainting a criminal case opens the door for defense attorneys to raise reasonable doubt.
Under NRS 171.126, a private person can perform a citizen’s arrest if they witness someone committing a crime, have the knowledge that they’ve committed a felony elsewhere, or they have reasonable cause to believe the person has committed a felony. A citizen’s arrest is permissible for gross misdemeanor and felony offenses. Under the statute, Nevada residents are permitted to use reasonable force to apprehend the suspect or even deadly force in self-defense. As they are not law enforcement officers, those found to have committed an illegal citizen’s arrest can face jail time, fines, and owe restitution to the wronged party.
Ser was convinced that Charlotte and Lucy Campbell, a married couple who made pornographic films, were guilty of distribution of obscene materials in interstate commerce, which is a federal felony under 18 U.S.C. § 1465. Either unaware that it was a federal law or mistakenly believing he had the right under Nevada law, Ser decided to bring them in to face criminal charges.
For his first attempt, Ser disguised himself as a pizza delivery worker and showed up at the Campbell home armed with handcuffs, duct tape, a taser, and pepper spray. After he attempted ot drag Lucy outside when she answered the door, the police were summoned. Ser was arrested but not charged, and after release was told to stay away from the Campbells. As you might imagine, he didn’t heed that advice.
After a second visit that consisted of leaving documents by the door, Ser came back a third time. The Campbells were divorced by then, and Charlotte was home with a boyfriend. Ser knocked on a window before entering the house unbidden through a side door. He followed Charlotte upstairs as she retrieved her gun. A struggle ensued, during which Ser struck Charlotte in the face several times. The gun went off several times without hitting anyone before she could unload it. 911 was called, and the police arrested Ser.
Committing a Violent Crime Isn't Upholding the Law ...
In trial court, Ser attempted to admit evidence to support his claim that he was making a citizen’s arrest for a federal offense. The court excluded his evidence, noting that he had not witnessed a federal felony being committed, hadn’t generated sufficient proof to justify a citizen’s arrest, and lacked the exigent circumstances that would have made entering the Campbell house as he did reasonable. His crusade saw him earn his own criminal history, as he was convicted for stalking, attempted second-degree kidnapping, second-degree kidnapping with the use of a deadly weapon, residential burglary while in the possession of a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon, and battery with substantial bodily harm.
Ser’s argument before the Nevada Supreme Court couldn’t overcome the simple legal fact that Nevada law didn’t allow him to act against an alleged federal offense. Because it was only a perceived violation of federal obscenity laws, Ser wasn’t entitled to use it as a defense. Nor was it the state’s responsibility to give lesser-included-offense instructions sua sponte.
Aside from upholding the verdict, the court expressed concern about the language of Nevada's statutes and the idea of citizens’ arrests in general, a viewpoint embraced by some legal scholars. Law enforcement officers are expected to conduct arrests in good faith and have been trained on the proper procedures for taking suspects into custody for alleged criminal conduct, such as having a court order.
As written, Nevada’s laws give untrained citizens the right to essentially ignore the Fourth Amendment provisions and force their way into a suspect’s home after announcing their presence and intent. Given Nevada’s somewhat lenient gun laws and no duty to retreat, the courts may be right to question the current statutes. Perhaps this case will cause some Nevada lawmakers to reconsider.
Related Resources
- When You Can Conduct a Citizen’s Arrest (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
- States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws (FindLaw’s State Laws)
- Citizen’s Arrest (FindLaw’s Criminal Procedure)
