finding of plain error in Nebraska

2024Barnes was granted a curative instruction, and as we previously stated, absent evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that a jury followed the instructions given in arriving at its verdict. 70 Barnes points to no such evidence here. 68 See, e.g., State v. McSwine, 292 Neb. 565 , 873 N.W.2d 405 (2016). 69 See, e.g., State v. Jones, 293 Neb. 452 , 462, 878 N.W.2d 379 , 387 (2016) (“[w]here an issue is raised and complained of at trial, it cannot be the basis of a finding of plain error on appeal”). 70 Fernandez, supra note 32 .

2024Barnes was granted a curative instruction, and as we previously stated, absent evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that a jury followed the instructions given in arriving at its verdict. 70 Barnes points to no such evidence here. 68 See, e.g., State v. McSwine, 292 Neb. 565 , 873 N.W.2d 405 (2016). 69 See, e.g., State v. Jones, 293 Neb. 452 , 462, 878 N.W.2d 379 , 387 (2016) (“[w]here an issue is raised and complained of at trial, it cannot be the basis of a finding of plain error on appeal”). 70 Fernandez, supra note 32 .

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020On cross-appeal, Geoffrey assigns, contingent on a finding of plain error in the district court’s conclusion that Tyler’s - 404 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 306 Nebraska Reports TYLER F. v. SARA P. Cite as 306 Neb. 397 paternity acknowledgment did not have to be set aside before the district court could determine whether Geoffrey had paternity, that the court erred in failing to set aside Tyler’s paternity acknowledgment.

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2020STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In a filiation proceeding, questions concerning child custody determinations are reviewed on appeal de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion by the trial court, whose judgment will be upheld in the absence of an abuse of discretion. 2 [2,3] Statutory interpretation presents a question of law. 3 When reviewing questions of law, an appellate court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 4 ANALYSIS Acknowledgment of Paternity Before reaching the assigned errors, we first a

2017He equates these statements to the comments made by the prosecutor in State v. Barfield, 272 Neb. 502 , 723 N.W.2d 303 (2006) in which the prosecutor insinuated that all defense lawyers are liars.

2017He equates these statements to the comments made by the prosecutor in State v. Barfield, 272 Neb. 502 , 723 N.W.2d 303 (2006) in which the prosecutor insinuated that all defense lawyers are liars.