sufficiency of the evidence claim in Nebraska

202 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2025 80 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 (11)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Bryantgreen neb · 2022 · cited in 7 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2022–2025 2 sentences 2022STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence, and - 212 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports STATE v. BRYANT Cite as 311 Neb. 206 such matters are for the finder of fact. 2022STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence, and - 212 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports STATE v. BRYANT Cite as 311 Neb. 206 such matters are for the finder of fact.	2	7
State v. Vandevergreen neb · 2014 · cited in 2 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017	2	2
State v. Samayoagreen neb · 2015 · cited in 7 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2015–2025 2 sentences 2025State v. Samayoa, 292 Neb. 334 , 873 N.W.2d 449 (2015). 2016State v. Samayoa, 292 Neb. 334 , 873 N.W.2d 449 (2015). [2,3] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: 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.	1	7
State v. Drapergreen neb · 2016 · cited in 6 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2016–2019 2 sentences 2016In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, the rel- evant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evi- dence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. - 89 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 295 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DRAPER Cite as 295 Neb. 88 8. 2016In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, we do not pass on the credibility of witnesses—that is for the trier of fact.13 8 State v. Smith, 292 Neb. 434 , 873 N.W.2d 169 (2016). 9 Id. 10 State v. Cullen, 292 Neb. 30 , 870 N.W.2d 784 (2015). 11 Id. 12 Brief for appellant at 9. 13 See State v. Newman, supra note 7. - 100 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 295 Nebraska R eports STATE v. DRAPER Cite as 295 Neb. 88 The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the pros- ecution, any rational trier of fact could have	1	6
State v. Thelengreen neb · 2020 · cited in 5 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2023 2 sentences 2023State v. Thelen, 305 Neb. 334 , 940 N.W.2d 259 (2020). 2023State v. Thelen, 305 Neb. 334 , 940 N.W.2d 259 (2020).	1	5
State v. Casterlinegreen neb · 2016 · cited in 4 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2016–2023 2 sentences 2023Id. [4] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence, and such matters are for the finders of fact. 2016STANDARD OF REVIEW [1,2] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: 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.1 The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonab	1	4
State v. Gonzalesgreen neb · 2016 · cited in 4 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2016–2019 2 sentences 2019State v. Gonzales, 294 Neb. 627 , 884 N.W.2d 102 (2016). 2016In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combina- tion thereof, the standard is the same: 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.63 The relevant question for an appellate court 61 See 2 LaFave, supra note 44. 62 State v. Lyle, supra note 47 . 63 State v. Casterline, supra note 2 . - 656 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. GONZALES Cite as 294 Neb.	1	4
State v. Dadygreen neb · 2019 · cited in 3 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2022 2 sentences 2022State v. Dady, 304 Neb. 649 , 936 N.W.2d 486 (2019). 2020See State v. Dady, 304 Neb. 649 , 936 N.W.2d 486 (2019). [4,5] In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of wit- nesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact.	1	3
State v. Keadlegreen neb · 2022 · cited in 1 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023	1	1
State v. Martinezgreen neb · 2020 · cited in 1 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021	1	1
State v. Montoyagreen nebctapp · 2021 · cited in 1 Nebraska opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (69)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Figures green neb · 2021 2 sentences 2024State v. Figures, 308 Neb. 801 , 957 N.W.2d 161 (2021). 2021Citing State v. Scott, 45 Figures claims there was insufficient corroboration of Figures’ confes- sion to Vanessa. 42 State v. McSwine, 292 Neb. 565 , 873 N.W.2d 405 (2016). 43 Hernandez, supra note 35 . 44 Id. 45 See State v. Scott, 200 Neb. 265 , 263 N.W.2d 659 (1978). - 826 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 308 Nebraska Reports STATE v. FIGURES Cite as 308 Neb. 801 (a) Standard of Review [28] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate cour	12	2021–2024
State v. Garcia green neb · 2019 2 sentences 2025State v. Garcia, 302 Neb. 406 , 923 N.W.2d 725 (2019). 2025State v. Garcia, 302 Neb. 406 , 923 N.W.2d 725 (2019).	11	2019–2025
State v. Stack green neb · 2020 2 sentences 2024State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020). 2024State v. Stack, 307 Neb. 773 , 950 N.W.2d 611 (2020).	10	2020–2024
State v. Escamilla green neb · 2015 2 sentences 2016State v. Escamilla, 291 Neb. 181 , 864 N.W.2d 376 (2015). 2016STANDARD OF REVIEW [1,2] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: 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.1 The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonab	10	2015–2016
State v. Smith green neb · 2019 2 sentences 2021State v. Smith, 302 Neb. 154 , 922 N.W.2d 444 (2019). 2021State v. Smith, 302 Neb. 154 , 922 N.W.2d 444 (2019).	8	2020–2021
State v. Miller green neb · 2022 2 sentences 2023State v. Miller, 312 Neb. 17 , 978 N.W.2d 19 (2022). 2022MILLER Cite as 312 Neb. 17 the trial court as the trier of fact and takes into consideration that the trial court has observed the witnesses testifying regard- ing the motion. 9 [4] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: 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. 10 The relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the li	6	2022–2023
State v. Tucker green neb · 2018 2 sentences 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018). [3] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, - 338 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appel- late 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. 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018). [3] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, - 338 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appel- late 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.	6	2018–2019
State v. Wiedeman green neb · 2013 2 sentences 2014State v. Wiedeman, 286 Neb. 193 , 835 N.W.2d 698 (2013). 2013But whether those facts trigger or violate Fourth Amendment Nebraska Advance Sheets STATE v. WIEDEMAN 203 Cite as 286 Neb. 193 protections is a question of law that we review independently of the trial court’s determination.1 [2] In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combina- tion thereof, the standard is the same: 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.2 The relevant question for an appellate court is wh	6	2013–2014
State v. Kalita green neb · 2024 2 sentences 2025The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. 12 12 State v. Kalita, 317 Neb. 906 , 12 N.W.3d 499 (2024). - 321 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 318 Nebraska Reports STATE V. 2025State v. Kalita, 317 Neb. 906 , 12 N.W.3d 499 (2024).	5	2024–2025
State v. McCurdy green neb · 2018 2 sentences 2020State v. McCurdy, 301 Neb. 343 , 918 N.W.2d 292 (2018). 2018Therefore, our analysis below is limited to the sufficiency of the evidence to support McCurdy’s conviction for first degree sexual assault of J.U. - 351 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 301 Nebraska R eports STATE v. McCURDY Cite as 301 Neb. 343 STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are f	5	2018–2020
State v. Mora green neb · 2017 2 sentences 2020State v. Mora, 298 Neb. 185 , 903 N.W.2d 244 (2017). 2019State v. Mora, 298 Neb. 185 , 903 N.W.2d 244 (2017).	4	2017–2020
State v. Wofford green neb · 2017 2 sentences 2019State v. Wofford, 298 Neb. 412 , 904 N.W.2d 649 (2017). 2018State v. Wofford, 298 Neb. 412 , 904 N.W.2d 649 (2017).	4	2018–2019
State v. Cotton green neb · 2018 2 sentences 2019State v. Cotton, 299 Neb. 650 , 910 N.W.2d 102 (2018), disapproved on other grounds, State v. Avina-Murillo, 301 Neb. 185 , 917 N.W.2d 865 (2018). 2018STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] A denial of a motion to sever will not be reversed unless clear prejudice and an abuse of discretion are shown, and an - 663 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 299 Nebraska R eports STATE v. COTTON Cite as 299 Neb. 650 appellate court will find such an abuse only where the denial caused the defendant substantial prejudice amounting to a mis- carriage of justice.1 [2] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does	4	2018–2019
State v. Mendez-Osorio green neb · 2017 2 sentences 2017State v. Mendez-Osorio, 297 Neb. 520 , 900 N.W.2d 776 (2017). 2017State v. Mendez-Osorio, 297 Neb. 520 , 900 N.W.2d 776 (2017).	4	2017–2017
State v. Lierman green neb · 2020 2 sentences 2025State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289 , 940 N.W.2d 529 (2020). 2025State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289 , 940 N.W.2d 529 (2020).	3	2020–2025
State v. Williams green neb · 2020 2 sentences 2022State v. Williams, 306 Neb. 261 , 945 N.W.2d 124 (2020). 2022State v. Williams, 306 Neb. 261 , 945 N.W.2d 124 (2020).	3	2021–2022
State v. Garcia green neb · 2022 2 sentences 2022State v. Garcia, 311 Neb. 648 , 974 N.W.2d 305 (2022). 2022STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circum- stantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evi- dence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the - 651 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GARCIA Cite as 311 Neb. 648 evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact.	3	2022–2022
State v. Rocha green neb · 2017 2 sentences 2020State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716 , 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017). 2020State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716 , 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017).	3	2018–2020
State v. Lester green neb · 2017 2 sentences 2020State v. Lester, 295 Neb. 878 , 898 N.W.2d 299 (2017). 2017In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: 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.56 The relevant question for an appellate court 55 State v. Buckman, 267 Neb. 505 , 675 N.W.2d 372 (2004). 56 State v. Newman, supra note 6; State v. Hale, 290 Neb. 70 , 858 N.W.2d 543 (2015). - 902 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 295 Nebraska R eports STATE v. LESTER Cite a	3	2017–2020
State v. Wells green neb · 2018 2 sentences 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018); State v. Wells, 300 Neb. 296 , 912 N.W.2d 896 (2018). 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018); State v. Wells, 300 Neb. 296 , 912 N.W.2d 896 (2018).	3	2018–2019
State v. Hibler green neb · 2019 2 sentences 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018). [3] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, - 338 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appel- late 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. 2019State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 , 920 N.W.2d 680 (2018). [3] In reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, - 338 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: An appel- late 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.	3	2019–2019
State v. Mrza green neb · 2019 2 sentences 2019The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.49 49 Smith, supra note 5 . - 951 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. MRZA Cite as 302 Neb. 931 (c) Analysis Mrza argues that although Neb. 2019The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.49 49 Smith, supra note 5 . - 951 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. MRZA Cite as 302 Neb. 931 (c) Analysis Mrza argues that although Neb.	3	2019–2019
State v. Pester green neb · 2016	3	2016–2018
State v. Dominguez green neb · 2015 2 sentences 2018State v. Dominguez, 290 Neb. 477 , 860 N.W.2d 732 (2015). 2016The relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favor- able to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reason- able doubt.5 [2] In proceedings where the Nebraska Evidence Rules apply, the admissibility of evidence is controlled by the Nebraska Evidence Rules; judicial discretion is involved only when the rules make discretion a factor in determining admissibility.6 [3] A trial court’s order denying a motion for new trial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.7 5 State v. Dom	3	2015–2018
State v. Jenkins green neb · 2016	3	2016–2016
State v. Kruger green neb · 2025	2	2025–2025
State v. Clark green neb · 2024	2	2025–2025
State v. Turner green neb · 2024	2	2024–2024
State v. Warlick green neb · 2021	2	2021–2021
State v. Eberhardt green neb · 1963	2	2021–2021
State v. Garza green neb · 1999	2	2021–2021
State v. Olbricht green neb · 2016	2	2021–2021
State v. Wood green neb · 2017	2	2017–2020
State v. Thomas green neb · 2019	2	2019–2020
State v. Avina-Murillo green neb · 2018	2	2019–2019
State v. Martinez green neb · 2016	2	2019–2019
State v. Loding green neb · 2017	2	2017–2017
State v. Jenkins green neb · 2016	2	2016–2017
State v. McCurry green neb · 2017	2	2017–2017
State v. Cullen green neb · 2015	2	2016–2016

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-105 (73) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-318 (35) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-319.01 (34) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-403 (32) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1205 (31) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-319 (28) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-404 (25) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-401 (23) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-801 (20) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1206 (19) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-416 (19) NE § Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.01 (18)

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

OH 1032 (1972–2026) LA 995 (1984–2026) PA 634 (1975–2026) TX 318 (1984–2026) IN 314 (1986–2025) WA 279 (1992–2026) CA 225 (1988–2026) CT 210 (1985–2026) NE 202 (1998–2025) TN 191 (1996–2026) IL 189 (1989–2026) IA 187 (1984–2026) MN 139 (1987–2026) NM 117 (1995–2025) MI 98 (1985–2026) MO 97 (1987–2025) VA 76 (1996–2026) WI 64 (1986–2026) CO 62 (1994–2026) UT 53 (1993–2026) WY 53 (1986–2026) FL 45 (1990–2025) KS 45 (1981–2026) AR 44 (2002–2026) ND 42 (1993–2026) NH 34 (1991–2025) MS 29 (1995–2024) GA 24 (1986–2024) NC 23 (1982–2026) ME 23 (1994–2025) NV 17 (1976–2022) OK 16 (1986–2013) MD 15 (1972–2026) AL 14 (1984–2025) DC 14 (1992–2025) WV 13 (1995–2024) MA 12 (1996–2024) NJ 12 (1996–2026) VT 10 (2013–2021) AZ 9 (2006–2026) GU 9 (2021–2024) MT 8 (1991–2024) ID 8 (2013–2021) HI 7 (2007–2023) DE 7 (2017–2025) VI 6 (2012–2017) OR 4 (2004–2025) SD 4 (2009–2022) KY 4 (2009–2025) SC 3 (2013–2020) AK 3 (2014–2021) RI 2 (2015–2015) NY 2 (2005–2025)

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

Your account

Appearance