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.
6 Nebraska opinions name it 1 courts 1924–1985 0 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. Tomrdlegreen2 sentences1985Stewart’s attorney did not object on the basis of relevancy when the evidence now assailed was adduced. “ ‘A defendant cannot predicate error on the admission of evidence to which no objection was made at the time the evidence was adduced.’ ” State v. Archbold, 217 Neb. 345, 351 , 350 N.W.2d 500, 505 (1984); State v. Tomrdle, 214 Neb. 580 , 335 N.W.2d 279 (1983). 1985Stewart’s attorney did not object on the basis of relevancy when the evidence now assailed was adduced. “ ‘A defendant cannot predicate error on the admission of evidence to which no objection was made at the time the evidence was adduced.’ ” State v. Archbold, 217 Neb. 345, 351 , 350 N.W.2d 500, 505 (1984); State v. Tomrdle, 214 Neb. 580 , 335 N.W.2d 279 (1983). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Archboldgreen2 sentences1985Stewart’s attorney did not object on the basis of relevancy when the evidence now assailed was adduced. “ ‘A defendant cannot predicate error on the admission of evidence to which no objection was made at the time the evidence was adduced.’ ” State v. Archbold, 217 Neb. 345, 351 , 350 N.W.2d 500, 505 (1984); State v. Tomrdle, 214 Neb. 580 , 335 N.W.2d 279 (1983). 1985Stewart’s attorney did not object on the basis of relevancy when the evidence now assailed was adduced. “ ‘A defendant cannot predicate error on the admission of evidence to which no objection was made at the time the evidence was adduced.’ ” State v. Archbold, 217 Neb. 345, 351 , 350 N.W.2d 500, 505 (1984); State v. Tomrdle, 214 Neb. 580 , 335 N.W.2d 279 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences1984See State v. Smith, 248 Iowa 603 , 81 N.W.2d 657 (1957). 1984See State v. Smith, 248 Iowa 603 , 81 N.W.2d 657 (1957). | 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. Weiland
neutral
2 sentences1983Cf., State v. Wetland, 186 Neb. 325 , 183 N.W.2d 244 (1971); State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139 , 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976). 1983Cf., State v. Wetland, 186 Neb. 325 , 183 N.W.2d 244 (1971); State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139 , 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976). | 2 | 1983–1983 |
State v. Holloman
green
2 sentences1983Cf., State v. Wetland, 186 Neb. 325 , 183 N.W.2d 244 (1971); State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139 , 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976). 1983Cf., State v. Wetland, 186 Neb. 325 , 183 N.W.2d 244 (1971); State v. Holloman, 197 Neb. 139 , 248 N.W.2d 15 (1976). | 2 | 1983–1983 |
Kerr v. State
neutral
1 sentence1924It is true that in this state the practice permits the giving of such instructions, but in Kerr v. State, 63 Neb. 115 , it is said: “Where no cautionary instruction has been requested with reference to the consideration of the testimony of witnesses employed as detectives, a defendant cannot predicate error because of the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on that point.” In the instant case such request wTas not made, and the charge as a whole seems to have fairly presented the issues to the jury'. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
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.