explicit legislative standard (Nebraska) · Go Syfert
← Nebraska issues

explicit legislative standard in Nebraska

5 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1988–1996 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Nebraska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Monasterogreen
neb · 1988 · cited in 4 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 1990–1996
2 sentences

1996Therefore, we must determine whether §§ 20-42 and 20-192 of the Omaha Municipal Code are constitutional as applied to Conklin. (a) Vagueness Challenge This court has previously held that “ ‘[d]ue process requires that a penal statute supply adequate and fair notice of the conduct prohibited and also supply an explicit legislative standard defining the proscribed conduct, to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory. enforcement at the discretion of law enforcement officials.’ ” State v. Schmailzl, 243 Neb. 734, 736 , 502 N.W.2d 463, 465 (1993) (quoting State v. Monastero, 228 Neb. 818 , 424 N.W.2d

1996Therefore, we must determine whether §§ 20-42 and 20-192 of the Omaha Municipal Code are constitutional as applied to Conklin. (a) Vagueness Challenge This court has previously held that “ ‘[d]ue process requires that a penal statute supply adequate and fair notice of the conduct prohibited and also supply an explicit legislative standard defining the proscribed conduct, to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory. enforcement at the discretion of law enforcement officials.’ ” State v. Schmailzl, 243 Neb. 734, 736 , 502 N.W.2d 463, 465 (1993) (quoting State v. Monastero, 228 Neb. 818 , 424 N.W.2d

24
State v. Schmailzlgreen
neb · 1993 · cited in 2 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 1995–1996
2 sentences

1996Therefore, we must determine whether §§ 20-42 and 20-192 of the Omaha Municipal Code are constitutional as applied to Conklin. (a) Vagueness Challenge This court has previously held that “ ‘[d]ue process requires that a penal statute supply adequate and fair notice of the conduct prohibited and also supply an explicit legislative standard defining the proscribed conduct, to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory. enforcement at the discretion of law enforcement officials.’ ” State v. Schmailzl, 243 Neb. 734, 736 , 502 N.W.2d 463, 465 (1993) (quoting State v. Monastero, 228 Neb. 818 , 424 N.W.2d

1996Therefore, we must determine whether §§ 20-42 and 20-192 of the Omaha Municipal Code are constitutional as applied to Conklin. (a) Vagueness Challenge This court has previously held that “ ‘[d]ue process requires that a penal statute supply adequate and fair notice of the conduct prohibited and also supply an explicit legislative standard defining the proscribed conduct, to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory. enforcement at the discretion of law enforcement officials.’ ” State v. Schmailzl, 243 Neb. 734, 736 , 502 N.W.2d 463, 465 (1993) (quoting State v. Monastero, 228 Neb. 818 , 424 N.W.2d

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Copple green
neb · 1987
2 sentences

1988See, Kolender v. *834 Lawson, supra; State v. Copple, 224 Neb. 672 , 401 N.W.2d 141 (1987); State v. Sailors, 217 Neb. 693 , 352 N.W.2d 860 (1984); L.

1988See, Kolender v. *834 Lawson, supra; State v. Copple, 224 Neb. 672 , 401 N.W.2d 141 (1987); State v. Sailors, 217 Neb. 693 , 352 N.W.2d 860 (1984); L.

11988–1988
State v. Sailors green
neb · 1984
2 sentences

1988See, Kolender v. *834 Lawson, supra; State v. Copple, 224 Neb. 672 , 401 N.W.2d 141 (1987); State v. Sailors, 217 Neb. 693 , 352 N.W.2d 860 (1984); L.

1988See, Kolender v. *834 Lawson, supra; State v. Copple, 224 Neb. 672 , 401 N.W.2d 141 (1987); State v. Sailors, 217 Neb. 693 , 352 N.W.2d 860 (1984); L.

11988–1988

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2315.01 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

NE 5 (1988–1996) VT 2 (2019–2019)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check