12 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2025 4 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. Custergreen2 sentences2024See State v. Custer, 292 Neb. 88 , 871 N.W.2d 243 (2015). 2024See State v. Custer, 292 Neb. 88 , 871 N.W.2d 243 (2015). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Francegreen2 sentences2024See State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009) (defendant has burden of going forward with evi- dence of self-defense, after which State has burden to prove defendant did not act in self-defense). 2024See State v. France, 279 Neb. 49 , 776 N.W.2d 510 (2009) (defendant has burden of going forward with evi- dence of self-defense, after which State has burden to prove defendant did not act in self-defense). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Byrdgreen2 sentences1990The situation is similar to that in State v. Byrd, 231 Neb. 231, 235 , 435 N.W.2d 898, 901 (1989), where the court noted: “Defendant’s proposed instruction No. 3 [regarding entrapment] was nearly identical to NJI 14.34, which was given by the court, and was submitted by the defendant as an alternative to his proposed instructions Nos. 1 and 2.” The jury was instructed, pursuant to instruction No. 4: Under Count I of the information in this case, depending on the evidence, you may find the defendant: a. 1990The situation is similar to that in State v. Byrd, 231 Neb. 231, 235 , 435 N.W.2d 898, 901 (1989), where the court noted: “Defendant’s proposed instruction No. 3 [regarding entrapment] was nearly identical to NJI 14.34, which was given by the court, and was submitted by the defendant as an alternative to his proposed instructions Nos. 1 and 2.” The jury was instructed, pursuant to instruction No. 4: Under Count I of the information in this case, depending on the evidence, you may find the defendant: a. | 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. Adams
green
2 sentences2024ADAMS Cite as 33 Neb. 2024ADAMS Cite as 33 Neb. | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. McMillion
green
2 sentences2016She acknowledges that the proposed jury instruction No. 3 was contained in the - 723 - Decisions of the Nebraska Court of A ppeals 23 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. McMILLION Cite as 23 Neb. 2016She acknowledges that the proposed jury instruction No. 3 was contained in the - 723 - Decisions of the Nebraska Court of A ppeals 23 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. McMILLION Cite as 23 Neb. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Pruett
green
2 sentences2025The State agrees that the district court erred. [15,16] In State v. Pruett, 263 Neb. 99, 638 N.W.2d 809 (2002), the court stated that under Nebraska statutory law, when the underlying felony for the use of a weapon charge is an unintentional crime, the defendant cannot be convicted of use of a weapon to commit a felony. 2025The State agrees that the district court erred. [15,16] In State v. Pruett, 263 Neb. 99, 638 N.W.2d 809 (2002), the court stated that under Nebraska statutory law, when the underlying felony for the use of a weapon charge is an unintentional crime, the defendant cannot be convicted of use of a weapon to commit a felony. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Ramsay
green
2 sentences2024Haynie also 2 State v. Ramsay, 257 Neb. 430 , 598 N.W.2d 51 (1999). 3 State v. Warrack, 21 Neb. 2024Haynie also 2 State v. Ramsay, 257 Neb. 430 , 598 N.W.2d 51 (1999). 3 State v. Warrack, 21 Neb. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Rothenberger
green
2 sentences2019State v. Rothenberger, 294 Neb. 810 , 885 N.W.2d 23 (2016). [16] Here, the district court used a pattern jury instruction regarding the jury’s evaluation of the credibility of an expert witness. 2019State v. Rothenberger, 294 Neb. 810 , 885 N.W.2d 23 (2016). [16] Here, the district court used a pattern jury instruction regarding the jury’s evaluation of the credibility of an expert witness. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Parnell
green
1 sentence2016The proposed jury instruction was not warranted by the evidence. [14,15] To establish reversible error from a court’s refusal to give a requested instruction, an appellant has the burden to show that (1) the tendered instruction is a correct statement of the law, (2) the tendered instruction is warranted by the 44 Id. at 881, 839 N.W.2d at 355. 45 Id. at 881, 839 N.W.2d at 355-56. 46 See State v. Smith, supra note 42. - 576 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v. PARNELL Cite as 294 Neb. 551 evidence, and (3) the appellant was prejudiced by the court’s refusal t | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Grosshans
neutral
2 sentences2006State v. Grosshans, 270 Neb. 660 , 707 N.W.2d 405 (2005). (iii) Analysis NJI2d Crim. 5.3A provides as follows: “During this trial I called your attention to some evidence that was received for specified limited purposes; you must consider that evidence only for those limited purposes and for no other.” We have said that in any situation in which a limiting instruction was given at the time evidence was introduced, NJI2d Crim. 5.3 must be given at closing if requested. 2006State v. Grosshans, 270 Neb. 660 , 707 N.W.2d 405 (2005). (iii) Analysis NJI2d Crim. 5.3A provides as follows: “During this trial I called your attention to some evidence that was received for specified limited purposes; you must consider that evidence only for those limited purposes and for no other.” We have said that in any situation in which a limiting instruction was given at the time evidence was introduced, NJI2d Crim. 5.3 must be given at closing if requested. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Harris
green
2 sentences2001Quintana offered a proposed jury instruction similar to NJI2d Crim. 4.1 with an added section entitled “Efficient Intervening Cause.” This added section had language taken from the case State v. Harris, 194 Neb. 74 , 230 N.W.2d 203 (1975). 2001Quintana offered a proposed jury instruction similar to NJI2d Crim. 4.1 with an added section entitled “Efficient Intervening Cause.” This added section had language taken from the case State v. Harris, 194 Neb. 74 , 230 N.W.2d 203 (1975). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Bank of Valley v. Mattson
green
2 sentences1993Based on this court’s citations from Restatement (Second) of Torts § 551 (1977) in Bank of Valley v. Mattson, 215 Neb. 596 , 339 N.W.2d 923 (1983), a case involving fraudulent misrepresentation, the plaintiffs submitted a proposed jury instruction on the law of fraudulent concealment, which stated: With regard to whether or not the Defendant fraudulently concealed any information from the Plaintiffs, you are instructed that under the law of the State of Nebraska, a party to a business transaction has a duty to exercise reasonable care to disclose subsequently acquired information that he knows 1993Based on this court’s citations from Restatement (Second) of Torts § 551 (1977) in Bank of Valley v. Mattson, 215 Neb. 596 , 339 N.W.2d 923 (1983), a case involving fraudulent misrepresentation, the plaintiffs submitted a proposed jury instruction on the law of fraudulent concealment, which stated: With regard to whether or not the Defendant fraudulently concealed any information from the Plaintiffs, you are instructed that under the law of the State of Nebraska, a party to a business transaction has a duty to exercise reasonable care to disclose subsequently acquired information that he knows | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.