absence of prejudicial error in Nebraska

1997Such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the properly admitted evidence, viewed and construed most favorably to the State, is sufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Pierce, 248 Neb. at 548 , 537 N.W.2d at 330-31 . (a) Robbery Neb.

1997Such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the properly admitted evidence, viewed and construed most favorably to the State, is sufficient to support the conviction.” State v. Pierce, 248 Neb. at 548 , 537 N.W.2d at 330-31 . (a) Robbery Neb.

2026Id.

2022Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insufficiency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed mos

2022Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insufficiency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed mos

2022Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insufficiency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed mos

2024State v. Cerros, 312 Neb. 230 , 978 N.W.2d 162 (2022); State v. Pauly, 311 Neb. 418 , 972 N.W.2d 907 (2022).

2024State v. Cerros, 312 Neb. 230 , 978 N.W.2d 162 (2022); State v. Pauly, 311 Neb. 418 , 972 N.W.2d 907 (2022).

2019STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circumstan- tial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insufficiency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the stan- dard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appel- late court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on - 708 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. STUBBENDIECK Cite as 302 Neb. 702 the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such mat- ters are for the find

2019STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circumstan- tial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insufficiency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the stan- dard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appel- late court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on - 708 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. STUBBENDIECK Cite as 302 Neb. 702 the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such mat- ters are for the find

2024In his first and second assignments of error, Tvrdy contends that the district court erroneously used jury instructions for 6 Id. 7 Id. 8 State v. Bershon, 313 Neb. 153 , 983 N.W.2d 490 (2023). 9 State v. Applehans, 314 Neb. 653 , 992 N.W.2d 464 (2023). 10 Id. 11 Id. - 761 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 315 Nebraska Reports STATE V.

2023BERSHON Cite as 313 Neb. 153 the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the stan- dard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appel- late court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such mat- ters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed most favorably to the State, is suf- ficient to support the conviction.

2020State v. Hatfield, ante p. 66, 933 N.W.2d 78 (2019). [3] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insuffi- ciency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error

2020State v. Hatfield, ante p. 66, 933 N.W.2d 78 (2019). [3] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insuffi- ciency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error

2019State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007); State v. Tucker, 17 Neb.

2019State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007); State v. Tucker, 17 Neb.

1998State v. Cody, 248 Neb. 683 , 539 N.W.2d 18 (1995); State v. Pierce, 248 Neb. 536 , 537 N.W.2d 323 (1995).

1998State v. Cody, 248 Neb. 683 , 539 N.W.2d 18 (1995); State v. Pierce, 248 Neb. 536 , 537 N.W.2d 323 (1995).

1996State v. Hirsch, 245 Neb. 31 , 511 N.W.2d 69 (1994).

1996State v. Hirsch, 245 Neb. 31 , 511 N.W.2d 69 (1994).

2025State v. Tvrdy, 315 Neb. 756 , 1 N.W.3d 479 (2024).

2024TVRDY Cite as 315 Neb. 756 reversal. 6 A jury instruction which misstates the issues and has a tendency to confuse the jury is erroneous. 7 [5] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insuffi- ciency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the

2025State v. Hassan, 309 Neb. 644 , 962 N.W.2d 210 (2021). [3] Whether two convictions result in multiple punishments for the same offense for double jeopardy purposes presents a question of law, on which an appellate court reaches a conclu- sion independent of the court below.

2025State v. Hassan, 309 Neb. 644 , 962 N.W.2d 210 (2021). [3] Whether two convictions result in multiple punishments for the same offense for double jeopardy purposes presents a question of law, on which an appellate court reaches a conclu- sion independent of the court below.

2022State v. Wheeler, 308 Neb. 708 , 956 N.W.2d 708 (2021).

2021See, also, State v. Grant, 293 Neb. 163 , 876 N.W.2d 639 (2016). [2] Regardless of whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, and regardless of whether the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insuffi- ciency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, - 721 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 308 Nebraska Reports STATE v. WHEELER Cite as 308 Neb. 708 pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evid

2018State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009).

2018State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009).

2020State v. McPherson, 266 Neb. 715 , 668 N.W.2d 488 (2003); State v. Shipps, 265 Neb. 342 , 656 N.W.2d 622 (2003). (b) Evidence Presented at Trial At trial, Stephen testified about the condition of the pickup truck and offered his opinion about its value at the time of the theft in November 2016.

2020State v. McPherson, 266 Neb. 715 , 668 N.W.2d 488 (2003); State v. Shipps, 265 Neb. 342 , 656 N.W.2d 622 (2003). (b) Evidence Presented at Trial At trial, Stephen testified about the condition of the pickup truck and offered his opinion about its value at the time of the theft in November 2016.

2008State v. Aldaco, 271 Neb. 160 , 710 N.W.2d 101 (2006).

2008State v. Aldaco, 271 Neb. 160 , 710 N.W.2d 101 (2006).

2008State v. Kuehn, 273 Neb. 219 , 728 N.W.2d 589 (2007); State v. Johnson, 261 Neb. 1001 , 627 N.W.2d 753 (2001).

2008State v. Kuehn, 273 Neb. 219 , 728 N.W.2d 589 (2007); State v. Johnson, 261 Neb. 1001 , 627 N.W.2d 753 (2001).

2004State v. Segura, 265 Neb. 903 , 660 N.W.2d 512 (2003); State v. Vaught, 12 Neb.

2004State v. Segura, 265 Neb. 903 , 660 N.W.2d 512 (2003); State v. Vaught, 12 Neb.

2001State v. Quintana, 261 Neb. 38 , 621 N.W.2d 121 (2001); State v. Owens, 257 Neb. 832 , 601 N.W.2d 231 (1999); State v. Larsen, 255 Neb. 532 , 586 N.W.2d 641 (1998); State v. Hill, 254 Neb. 460 , 577 N.W.2d 259 (1998).

2001State v. Quintana, 261 Neb. 38 , 621 N.W.2d 121 (2001); State v. Owens, 257 Neb. 832 , 601 N.W.2d 231 (1999); State v. Larsen, 255 Neb. 532 , 586 N.W.2d 641 (1998); State v. Hill, 254 Neb. 460 , 577 N.W.2d 259 (1998).

2000State v. Larsen, 255 Neb. 532 , 586 N.W.2d 641 *145 (1998); State v. Jacob, 253 Neb. 950 , 574 N.W.2d 117 (1998); State v. Becerra, 253 Neb. 653 , 573 N.W.2d 397 (1998).

2000State v. Larsen, 255 Neb. 532 , 586 N.W.2d 641 *145 (1998); State v. Jacob, 253 Neb. 950 , 574 N.W.2d 117 (1998); State v. Becerra, 253 Neb. 653 , 573 N.W.2d 397 (1998).

1998State v. Stubbs, 252 Neb. 420 , 562 N.W.2d 547 (1997); State v. Beethe, 249 Neb. 743 , 545 N.W.2d 108 (1996); State v. Brozovsky, 249 Neb. 723 , 545 N.W.2d 98 (1996).

1998State v. Stubbs, 252 Neb. 420 , 562 N.W.2d 547 (1997); State v. Beethe, 249 Neb. 743 , 545 N.W.2d 108 (1996); State v. Brozovsky, 249 Neb. 723 , 545 N.W.2d 98 (1996).

2026State v. Osborne, 313 Neb. 726 , 986 N.W.2d 65 (2023).

2023OSBORNE Cite as 313 Neb. 726 the issue is labeled as a failure to direct a verdict, insuffi- ciency of the evidence, or failure to prove a prima facie case, the standard is the same: In reviewing a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed most favorably to the State, is sufficient to support the conviction.

2025State v. Barnes, 317 Neb. 517 , 10 N.W.3d 716 (2024). -3- An appellate court will not disturb a sentence imposed within the statutory limits absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court.

2024BARNES Cite as 317 Neb. 517 court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed most favor- ably to the State, is sufficient to support the conviction. 8.

2025State v. Guzman, 305 Neb. 376 , 940 N.W.2d 552 (2020). [2] Whether jury instructions given by a trial court are cor- rect is a question of law.

2025State v. Guzman, 305 Neb. 376 , 940 N.W.2d 552 (2020). [2] Whether jury instructions given by a trial court are cor- rect is a question of law.

2020State v. McPherson, 266 Neb. 715 , 668 N.W.2d 488 (2003); State v. Shipps, 265 Neb. 342 , 656 N.W.2d 622 (2003). (b) Evidence Presented at Trial At trial, Stephen testified about the condition of the pickup truck and offered his opinion about its value at the time of the theft in November 2016.

2020State v. McPherson, 266 Neb. 715 , 668 N.W.2d 488 (2003); State v. Shipps, 265 Neb. 342 , 656 N.W.2d 622 (2003). (b) Evidence Presented at Trial At trial, Stephen testified about the condition of the pickup truck and offered his opinion about its value at the time of the theft in November 2016.

2019State v. Sanders , 269 Neb. 895 , 697 N.W.2d 657 (2005).

2019State v. Sanders , 269 Neb. 895 , 697 N.W.2d 657 (2005).

2016State v. Custer, 292 Neb. 88 , 871 N.W.2d 243 (2015). [4] An appellate court will not disturb a sentence imposed within the statutory limits absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court.

2015In reviewing a claim that the evidence was insufficient to support a criminal conviction, an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the - 107 - Nebraska A dvance Sheets 292 Nebraska R eports STATE v. CUSTER Cite as 292 Neb. 88 finder of fact, and a conviction will be affirmed, in the absence of prejudicial error, if the evidence admitted at trial, viewed and construed most favorably to the State, is sufficient to sup- port the conviction.