Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
37 Nebraska opinions name it 3 courts 1982–2026 11 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Voslergreen2 sentences2000In Vosler , we noted that because the State could not compel a defendant to submit to a mental examination unless he or she tenders an insanity defense, “[t]he State could also have an appropriate witness attend the trial and testify on the issue [of the defendant’s mental state] based upon what the witness learned as a result of the evidence adduced at trial.” 216 Neb. at 471 , 345 N.W.2d at 812 . 2000In Vosler , we noted that because the State could not compel a defendant to submit to a mental examination unless he or she tenders an insanity defense, “[t]he State could also have an appropriate witness attend the trial and testify on the issue [of the defendant’s mental state] based upon what the witness learned as a result of the evidence adduced at trial.” 216 Neb. at 471 , 345 N.W.2d at 812 . | 3 | 7 |
State v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2019See State v. Williams , 295 Neb. 575 , 889 N.W.2d 99 (2017). 2017Finding no prejudice, we cannot conclude that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the statements. (viii) Failure to Assert Drug Psychosis/Insanity or Drug Impairment Defense Williams argues that direct appeal counsel should have raised trial counsel’s failure to present evidence or a psychiatrist - 599 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 295 Nebraska R eports STATE v. WILLIAMS Cite as 295 Neb. 575 to show that Williams did not have the requisite intent to commit the crime of arson due to his prolonged substance abuse and his drug use prior to the fire and the subsequent polic | 2 | 4 |
Bohac v. Benes Service Co.green2 sentences2023See, also, Floor Debate, 102d Leg., 1st Sess. 11-12 (Mar. 15, 2011). 49 Bohac v. Benes Service Co., 310 Neb. 722 , 969 N.W.2d 103 (2022). 50 Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 , 134 S. Ct. 1710 , 188 L. 2023See, also, Floor Debate, 102d Leg., 1st Sess. 11-12 (Mar. 15, 2011). 49 Bohac v. Benes Service Co., 310 Neb. 722 , 969 N.W.2d 103 (2022). 50 Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 , 134 S. Ct. 1710 , 188 L. | 2 | 2 |
Wright v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2023Rep. 718, 10 Cl. & Fin. 200. 21 Wright v. The People, 4 Neb. 407, 409 (1876). 2023Rep. 718, 10 Cl. & Fin. 200. 21 Wright v. The People, 4 Neb. 407, 409 (1876). | 2 | 2 |
Paroline v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2023See, also, Floor Debate, 102d Leg., 1st Sess. 11-12 (Mar. 15, 2011). 49 Bohac v. Benes Service Co., 310 Neb. 722 , 969 N.W.2d 103 (2022). 50 Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 , 134 S. Ct. 1710 , 188 L. 2023See, also, Floor Debate, 102d Leg., 1st Sess. 11-12 (Mar. 15, 2011). 49 Bohac v. Benes Service Co., 310 Neb. 722 , 969 N.W.2d 103 (2022). 50 Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 , 134 S. Ct. 1710 , 188 L. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Liermangreen2 sentences2025See State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289 , 940 N.W.2d 529 (2020). (a) Understanding of Law Ashing argues that her trial counsel misunderstood the law because counsel believed an insanity defense may be supported by evidence that a defendant has a serious mental illness “in general,” rather than at the time the offense was committed. 2025See State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289 , 940 N.W.2d 529 (2020). (a) Understanding of Law Ashing argues that her trial counsel misunderstood the law because counsel believed an insanity defense may be supported by evidence that a defendant has a serious mental illness “in general,” rather than at the time the offense was committed. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2002Id. 2002(Citation omitted.) State v. Smith, 256 Neb. 705, 710 , 592 N.W.2d 143, 147 (1999). | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Ryangreen | 1 | 1 |
| John Wayne Gacy v. George Welborn, Warden, Menard Correctional Center, and Roland W. Burris, Attorney General of Illinoisgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hood
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 7 | 2018–2024 |
State v. Stack
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 6 | 2020–2023 |
State v. Brennauer
green
2 sentences2023BRENNAUER Cite as 314 Neb. 782 consider, for the first time, the effect of § 29-2203(4) on the insanity defense. 10 Because the parties did not specifically address the effect of § 29-2203(4) in their initial brief- ing on appeal, we ordered supplemental briefing after oral argument. 2023BRENNAUER Cite as 314 Neb. 782 consider, for the first time, the effect of § 29-2203(4) on the insanity defense. 10 Because the parties did not specifically address the effect of § 29-2203(4) in their initial brief- ing on appeal, we ordered supplemental briefing after oral argument. | 3 | 2023–2026 |
State v. John
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 3 | 2022–2025 |
State v. Bigelow
green
2 sentences2019At the jury instruction conference, Bigelow objected to the court’s draft instruction regarding the elements of the crime - 733 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 303 Nebraska R eports STATE v. BIGELOW Cite as 303 Neb. 729 charged; he instead proposed an instruction that incorporated the insanity defense. 2019Regarding the proposed insanity instruction, the Court of Appeals agreed with the district court’s determination that - 734 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 303 Nebraska R eports STATE v. BIGELOW Cite as 303 Neb. 729 the evidence did not support an insanity defense. | 3 | 2019–2023 |
State v. McGhee
neutral
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 3 | 2009–2022 |
State v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 3 | 2021–2022 |
Kennison v. State
green
2 sentences2023However, the State requested an instruction be given mirroring the language of § 29-2203(4), which the jury received as instruction No. 6: “Insanity does not include any temporary condition that was proximately caused by the voluntary ingestion, inhala- tion, injection, or absorption of intoxicating liquor, any drug or mentally debilitating substance, or any combination thereof.” Brennauer objected to the giving of instruction No. 6 at trial, but he does not assign the giving of such instruction as error on appeal. [5-7] However, the Nebraska Constitution guarantees a fair and impartial trial 2023However, the State requested an instruction be given mirroring the language of § 29-2203(4), which the jury received as instruction No. 6: “Insanity does not include any temporary condition that was proximately caused by the voluntary ingestion, inhala- tion, injection, or absorption of intoxicating liquor, any drug or mentally debilitating substance, or any combination thereof.” Brennauer objected to the giving of instruction No. 6 at trial, but he does not assign the giving of such instruction as error on appeal. [5-7] However, the Nebraska Constitution guarantees a fair and impartial trial | 2 | 2023–2023 |
State v. McGuire
green
2 sentences2023We do not read the legislation to have effectuated any change in the insanity defense as it was established in this state. 42 A proponent’s testimony at the committee hearing that “the goal of this legislation is to directly prevent those temporary mental illnesses that are directly or proximately caused by the drugs themselves and not some permanent, non-self-induced, directly self-induced mental illness like settled insanity that develops over time” 43 speaks most directly to that intent. 40 State v. Jedlicka, 305 Neb. 52 , 938 N.W.2d 854 (2020). 41 State v. McGuire, 301 Neb. 895 , 921 N.W.2 2023We do not read the legislation to have effectuated any change in the insanity defense as it was established in this state. 42 A proponent’s testimony at the committee hearing that “the goal of this legislation is to directly prevent those temporary mental illnesses that are directly or proximately caused by the drugs themselves and not some permanent, non-self-induced, directly self-induced mental illness like settled insanity that develops over time” 43 speaks most directly to that intent. 40 State v. Jedlicka, 305 Neb. 52 , 938 N.W.2d 854 (2020). 41 State v. McGuire, 301 Neb. 895 , 921 N.W.2 | 2 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Jedlicka
green
2 sentences2023We do not read the legislation to have effectuated any change in the insanity defense as it was established in this state. 42 A proponent’s testimony at the committee hearing that “the goal of this legislation is to directly prevent those temporary mental illnesses that are directly or proximately caused by the drugs themselves and not some permanent, non-self-induced, directly self-induced mental illness like settled insanity that develops over time” 43 speaks most directly to that intent. 40 State v. Jedlicka, 305 Neb. 52 , 938 N.W.2d 854 (2020). 41 State v. McGuire, 301 Neb. 895 , 921 N.W.2 2023We do not read the legislation to have effectuated any change in the insanity defense as it was established in this state. 42 A proponent’s testimony at the committee hearing that “the goal of this legislation is to directly prevent those temporary mental illnesses that are directly or proximately caused by the drugs themselves and not some permanent, non-self-induced, directly self-induced mental illness like settled insanity that develops over time” 43 speaks most directly to that intent. 40 State v. Jedlicka, 305 Neb. 52 , 938 N.W.2d 854 (2020). 41 State v. McGuire, 301 Neb. 895 , 921 N.W.2 | 2 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Collins
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 2 | 2022–2022 |
State v. France
green
2 sentences2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o 2022Supp. 2020). 2 State v. Johnson, 308 Neb. 331 , 953 N.W.2d 772 (2021); State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020); State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009); State v. McGhee, 274 Neb. 660 , 742 N.W.2d 497 (2007). 3 State v. Collins, 307 Neb. 581 , 950 N.W.2d 89 (2020); State v. Hood, 301 Neb. 207 , 917 N.W.2d 880 (2018). 4 Id. - 966 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHN Cite as 310 Neb. 958 ANALYSIS Insanity Defense [4,5] Any person prosecuted for an offense may plead that he or she is not responsible by reason of insanity at the time o | 2 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Lofquest
green
2 sentences2016The Nebraska Supreme Court followed the Doyle line of cases, starting in State v. Lofquest, 223 Neb. 87 , 388 N.W.2d 115 (1986). 2016The Nebraska Supreme Court followed the Doyle line of cases, starting in State v. Lofquest, 223 Neb. 87 , 388 N.W.2d 115 (1986). | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Washington v. State
green
2 sentences1989See, State v. Robertson, supra; Thompson v. State, 159 Neb. 685 , 68 N.W.2d 267 (1955); Washington v. State, 165 Neb. 275 , 85 N.W.2d 509 (1957); Schwartz v. State, 65 Neb. 196 , 91 N.W. 190 (1902). 1989See, State v. Robertson, supra; Thompson v. State, 159 Neb. 685 , 68 N.W.2d 267 (1955); Washington v. State, 165 Neb. 275 , 85 N.W.2d 509 (1957); Schwartz v. State, 65 Neb. 196 , 91 N.W. 190 (1902). | 2 | 1984–1989 |
State v. Nelson
green
2 sentences2023But, in relation to a similar claim that the State’s continuance which delayed the trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress should provide an exception to the general rule, in State v. Nelson, 313 Neb. at 475 , 984 N.W.2d at 630 , the Nebraska Supreme Court explicitly held that “[w]e decline [the defendant’s] invitation to create a general exception to the mandate of § 29-1207(4)(a) for delays in hearing a defendant’s pretrial motions due to continuances granted to the State.” Instead, the Court reiterated: -4- [T]he plain terms of § 29-1207(4)(a) dictate the exclusion of all time between 2023But, in relation to a similar claim that the State’s continuance which delayed the trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress should provide an exception to the general rule, in State v. Nelson, 313 Neb. at 475 , 984 N.W.2d at 630 , the Nebraska Supreme Court explicitly held that “[w]e decline [the defendant’s] invitation to create a general exception to the mandate of § 29-1207(4)(a) for delays in hearing a defendant’s pretrial motions due to continuances granted to the State.” Instead, the Court reiterated: -4- [T]he plain terms of § 29-1207(4)(a) dictate the exclusion of all time between | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Britt
green
1 sentence2022He argues that the failure to do so “prevented Price from raising a cognizable defense and, therefore, denied him due process of law.” Id. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Warner
green
1 sentence2022WARNER Cite as 312 Neb. 116 Warner’s filing of a notice of intention to rely upon an insanity defense preserved his right to present evidence as to his sanity at trial. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences2021STANDARDS OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a motion to suppress a statement based on its claimed involuntariness, including claims that law enforce- ment procured it by violating the safeguards established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. 2021STANDARDS OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a motion to suppress a statement based on its claimed involuntariness, including claims that law enforce- ment procured it by violating the safeguards established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Privett
green
1 sentence2019Ed. 2d 674 (1984). 11 State v. Armendariz, 289 Neb. 896 , 857 N.W.2d 775 (2015). 12 Id. 13 Id. 14 Brief for appellant at 7. 15 Id. at 11 . - 410 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 303 Nebraska R eports STATE v. PRIVETT Cite as 303 Neb. 404 the district court correctly determined, trial counsel did con- duct a diligent investigation when they filed a notice of intent to rely on the insanity defense and a motion for a psychologi- cal examination of Privett. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Urbano
green
2 sentences2018State v. Urbano, 256 Neb. 194 , 589 N.W.2d 144 (1999). “‘[A]lthough there is but one type of insanity which will support a finding of not guilty or not responsible by reason of insanity, there - 10 - are a variety of mental conditions which bear upon the ability to form a specific intent.’” Id. at 204 , 589 N.W.2d at 152 -53 (quoting State v. Vosler, 216 Neb. 461, 468 , 345 N.W.2d 806, 811 (1984)). 2018State v. Urbano, 256 Neb. 194 , 589 N.W.2d 144 (1999). “‘[A]lthough there is but one type of insanity which will support a finding of not guilty or not responsible by reason of insanity, there - 10 - are a variety of mental conditions which bear upon the ability to form a specific intent.’” Id. at 204 , 589 N.W.2d at 152 -53 (quoting State v. Vosler, 216 Neb. 461, 468 , 345 N.W.2d 806, 811 (1984)). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Quezada
green
1 sentence2016App. 836 , 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013). 46 State v. Marks, 286 Neb. 166 , 835 N.W.2d 656 (2013); State v. McGhee, 280 Neb. 558 , 787 N.W.2d 700 (2010). - 958 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DUBRAY Cite as 294 Neb. 937 (j) Insanity Defense Dubray asserts a layered claim based on trial counsel’s failure to investigate and assert an insanity defense. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Marks
green
2 sentences2016App. 836 , 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013). 46 State v. Marks, 286 Neb. 166 , 835 N.W.2d 656 (2013); State v. McGhee, 280 Neb. 558 , 787 N.W.2d 700 (2010). - 958 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DUBRAY Cite as 294 Neb. 937 (j) Insanity Defense Dubray asserts a layered claim based on trial counsel’s failure to investigate and assert an insanity defense. 2016App. 836 , 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013). 46 State v. Marks, 286 Neb. 166 , 835 N.W.2d 656 (2013); State v. McGhee, 280 Neb. 558 , 787 N.W.2d 700 (2010). - 958 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DUBRAY Cite as 294 Neb. 937 (j) Insanity Defense Dubray asserts a layered claim based on trial counsel’s failure to investigate and assert an insanity defense. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Dubray
green
1 sentence2016App. 836 , 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013). 46 State v. Marks, 286 Neb. 166 , 835 N.W.2d 656 (2013); State v. McGhee, 280 Neb. 558 , 787 N.W.2d 700 (2010). - 958 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DUBRAY Cite as 294 Neb. 937 (j) Insanity Defense Dubray asserts a layered claim based on trial counsel’s failure to investigate and assert an insanity defense. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| State v. Lesiak green | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| Sullivan v. Louisiana green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Mallin v. Farmers Insurance Exchange green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Hill v. Lockhart green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Thompson v. State green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Schwartz v. State neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Estelle v. Smith green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| State v. Hall green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Sinclair v. State green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.
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.