defendant assigns error in Nebraska

2017State v. Duncan, 278 Neb. 1006 , 775 N.W.2d 922 (2009).

2017State v. Duncan, 278 Neb. 1006 , 775 N.W.2d 922 (2009).

1989In State v. Reitenbaugh, 204 Neb. 583 , 284 N.W.2d 19 (1979), and State v. Williams, 205 Neb. 56 , 287 N.W.2d 18 (1979), we held that it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct a jury in a criminal case of the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.

1989In State v. Reitenbaugh, 204 Neb. 583 , 284 N.W.2d 19 (1979), and State v. Williams, 205 Neb. 56 , 287 N.W.2d 18 (1979), we held that it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct a jury in a criminal case of the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.

1989In State v. Reitenbaugh, 204 Neb. 583 , 284 N.W.2d 19 (1979), and State v. Williams, 205 Neb. 56 , 287 N.W.2d 18 (1979), we held that it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct a jury in a criminal case of the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.

1989In State v. Reitenbaugh, 204 Neb. 583 , 284 N.W.2d 19 (1979), and State v. Williams, 205 Neb. 56 , 287 N.W.2d 18 (1979), we held that it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct a jury in a criminal case of the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.

1987We have held that a trial court will be justified in directing a verdict of not guilty only where there is a total failure of competent proof to support a material allegation in the information, or where the testimony is of so weak or doubtful a character that conviction based thereon could not be sustained. *52 State v. Kane, 224 Neb. 245 , 397 N.W.2d 628 (1986); State v. Bridger, 223 Neb. 250 , 388 N.W.2d 831 (1986).

1987We have held that a trial court will be justified in directing a verdict of not guilty only where there is a total failure of competent proof to support a material allegation in the information, or where the testimony is of so weak or doubtful a character that conviction based thereon could not be sustained. *52 State v. Kane, 224 Neb. 245 , 397 N.W.2d 628 (1986); State v. Bridger, 223 Neb. 250 , 388 N.W.2d 831 (1986).

1987We have held that a trial court will be justified in directing a verdict of not guilty only where there is a total failure of competent proof to support a material allegation in the information, or where the testimony is of so weak or doubtful a character that conviction based thereon could not be sustained. *52 State v. Kane, 224 Neb. 245 , 397 N.W.2d 628 (1986); State v. Bridger, 223 Neb. 250 , 388 N.W.2d 831 (1986).

1987We have held that a trial court will be justified in directing a verdict of not guilty only where there is a total failure of competent proof to support a material allegation in the information, or where the testimony is of so weak or doubtful a character that conviction based thereon could not be sustained. *52 State v. Kane, 224 Neb. 245 , 397 N.W.2d 628 (1986); State v. Bridger, 223 Neb. 250 , 388 N.W.2d 831 (1986).

1985In Grubbs v. Kula, 212 Neb. 735 , 325 N.W.2d 835 (1982), we stated: In a law action tried without a jury, it is not within our province to resolve evidentiary conflicts or to weigh evidence; rather, it is our obligation to review the judgment entered in light of the evidence and to consider the evidence in that light most favorable to the successful party, resolving all conflicts in his favor and granting him the benefit of every inference which is reasonably deducible therefrom.

1985In Grubbs v. Kula, 212 Neb. 735 , 325 N.W.2d 835 (1982), we stated: In a law action tried without a jury, it is not within our province to resolve evidentiary conflicts or to weigh evidence; rather, it is our obligation to review the judgment entered in light of the evidence and to consider the evidence in that light most favorable to the successful party, resolving all conflicts in his favor and granting him the benefit of every inference which is reasonably deducible therefrom.

1964The admissibility of the results of the test of the defendant’s blood in the instant case is established by the decision in Schacht v. State, 154 Neb. 858 , 50 N. W. 2d 78 , wherein this court said: “The defendant assigns as error the evidence of the chemist in the laboratory of the state Department of Health who tested the blood samples taken from the defendant, and the result which showed an alcoholic content in the blood sufficient to produce intoxication.

1964The admissibility of the results of the test of the defendant’s blood in the instant case is established by the decision in Schacht v. State, 154 Neb. 858 , 50 N. W. 2d 78 , wherein this court said: “The defendant assigns as error the evidence of the chemist in the laboratory of the state Department of Health who tested the blood samples taken from the defendant, and the result which showed an alcoholic content in the blood sufficient to produce intoxication.

1957In Remmenga v. Selk, 152 Neb. 625 , 42 N. W. 2d 186 , we said: “A verdict may be set aside as excessive only When it is so clearly exorbitant as to indicate that it was the-result of’passion, prejudice,' or mistake, or that it is clear' that the jury disregarded the evidence or controlling rules of law.” See, also, Fridley v. Brush, 161 Neb. 318 , 73 N. W. 2d 376 . ■ “The law gives to the jury the right to determine the ■amount of recovery in cases of personal injury.

1957In Remmenga v. Selk, 152 Neb. 625 , 42 N. W. 2d 186 , we said: “A verdict may be set aside as excessive only When it is so clearly exorbitant as to indicate that it was the-result of’passion, prejudice,' or mistake, or that it is clear' that the jury disregarded the evidence or controlling rules of law.” See, also, Fridley v. Brush, 161 Neb. 318 , 73 N. W. 2d 376 . ■ “The law gives to the jury the right to determine the ■amount of recovery in cases of personal injury.

1957In Remmenga v. Selk, 152 Neb. 625 , 42 N. W. 2d 186 , we said: “A verdict may be set aside as excessive only When it is so clearly exorbitant as to indicate that it was the-result of’passion, prejudice,' or mistake, or that it is clear' that the jury disregarded the evidence or controlling rules of law.” See, also, Fridley v. Brush, 161 Neb. 318 , 73 N. W. 2d 376 . ■ “The law gives to the jury the right to determine the ■amount of recovery in cases of personal injury.

1957In Remmenga v. Selk, 152 Neb. 625 , 42 N. W. 2d 186 , we said: “A verdict may be set aside as excessive only When it is so clearly exorbitant as to indicate that it was the-result of’passion, prejudice,' or mistake, or that it is clear' that the jury disregarded the evidence or controlling rules of law.” See, also, Fridley v. Brush, 161 Neb. 318 , 73 N. W. 2d 376 . ■ “The law gives to the jury the right to determine the ■amount of recovery in cases of personal injury.

1953“When the provisions of a contract together with the facts and circumstances that aid in ascertaining the intent of the parties thereto are not in dispute, the proper construction of such contract is a question of law.” Kimball v. Cooper, 134 Neb. 536 , 279 N. W. 194 .

1953“When the provisions of a contract together with the facts and circumstances that aid in ascertaining the intent of the parties thereto are not in dispute, the proper construction of such contract is a question of law.” Kimball v. Cooper, 134 Neb. 536 , 279 N. W. 194 .

1952Defendant largely relies on *898 the case of Harris v. State, 24 Neb. 803 , 40 N. W. 317 .

1946He relies upon the rule stated in the syllabus of Peterson v. State, 79 Neb. 132 , 112 N. W. 306 , which is as follows: “A prosecution for the violation of a city ordinance, which does not embrace any offense made criminal by the laws of the state, while in form a criminal prosecution, is, in fact, a civil proceeding to recover a penalty, and clear and satisfactory proof that the offense has been committed is sufficient to sustain a conviction.

1946He relies upon the rule stated in the syllabus of Peterson v. State, 79 Neb. 132 , 112 N. W. 306 , which is as follows: “A prosecution for the violation of a city ordinance, which does not embrace any offense made criminal by the laws of the state, while in form a criminal prosecution, is, in fact, a civil proceeding to recover a penalty, and clear and satisfactory proof that the offense has been committed is sufficient to sustain a conviction.

1944With reference to the general assignment as to the instructions given by the court, the following rule announced in Hiatt v. Kinkaid, 40 Neb. 178 , 58 N. W. 700 , is applicable: “An assignment of error as, to the giving en masse of certain .instructions will be considered no further than to ascertain that any one of such instructions was properly given.” However, in view of the defendant’s separate assignment of error as to 16 of the 23 instructions, which he tendered, but all of which the court refused, it will be necessary to examine and consider all of the instructions given by the court fo

1944With reference to the general assignment as to the instructions given by the court, the following rule announced in Hiatt v. Kinkaid, 40 Neb. 178 , 58 N. W. 700 , is applicable: “An assignment of error as, to the giving en masse of certain .instructions will be considered no further than to ascertain that any one of such instructions was properly given.” However, in view of the defendant’s separate assignment of error as to 16 of the 23 instructions, which he tendered, but all of which the court refused, it will be necessary to examine and consider all of the instructions given by the court fo

1944With reference to the general assignment as to the instructions given by the court, the following rule announced in Hiatt v. Kinkaid, 40 Neb. 178 , 58 N. W. 700 , is applicable: “An assignment of error as, to the giving en masse of certain .instructions will be considered no further than to ascertain that any one of such instructions was properly given.” However, in view of the defendant’s separate assignment of error as to 16 of the 23 instructions, which he tendered, but all of which the court refused, it will be necessary to examine and consider all of the instructions given by the court fo

1944The plaintiff contends that this assignment of error cannot be argued before this court, for the reason that it was not called to the attention of the trial court in defendant’s motion for a new trial; citing Drainage District v. Dawson County Irrigation Co., 140 Neb. 866 , 2 N. W. 2d 321 , wherein it was held: “Where a jury is waived in a law action, the case is tried to the court, and the final judgment rests upon findings by the court, in order that errors of law occurring at the trial may be considered by this court, the district court’s attention must have been called to them by a motion

1944The plaintiff contends that this assignment of error cannot be argued before this court, for the reason that it was not called to the attention of the trial court in defendant’s motion for a new trial; citing Drainage District v. Dawson County Irrigation Co., 140 Neb. 866 , 2 N. W. 2d 321 , wherein it was held: “Where a jury is waived in a law action, the case is tried to the court, and the final judgment rests upon findings by the court, in order that errors of law occurring at the trial may be considered by this court, the district court’s attention must have been called to them by a motion

1944With reference to the general assignment as to the instructions given by the court, the following rule announced in Hiatt v. Kinkaid, 40 Neb. 178 , 58 N. W. 700 , is applicable: “An assignment of error as, to the giving en masse of certain .instructions will be considered no further than to ascertain that any one of such instructions was properly given.” However, in view of the defendant’s separate assignment of error as to 16 of the 23 instructions, which he tendered, but all of which the court refused, it will be necessary to examine and consider all of the instructions given by the court fo

1944With reference to the general assignment as to the instructions given by the court, the following rule announced in Hiatt v. Kinkaid, 40 Neb. 178 , 58 N. W. 700 , is applicable: “An assignment of error as, to the giving en masse of certain .instructions will be considered no further than to ascertain that any one of such instructions was properly given.” However, in view of the defendant’s separate assignment of error as to 16 of the 23 instructions, which he tendered, but all of which the court refused, it will be necessary to examine and consider all of the instructions given by the court fo

1907It is insisted, under the rule announced in Williams v. State, 6 Neb. 334 , that, where there are distinct offenses charged in different counts of the information, as in the case at bar, the jury must either return a general verdict of not guilty, or respond specially to each charge in the information.