Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 25
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2405 (2026)

Interpreters; oath

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every interpreter, except those certified under the rules of the Supreme Court and who have taken the prescribed oath of office, appointed pursuant to sections 25-2401 to 25-2407, before entering upon his or her duties as such, shall take an oath that he or she will, to the best of his or her skill and judgment, make a true interpretation to such person unable to communicate the English language of all the proceedings in a language which such person understands and that he or she will, in the English language, repeat the statements of such person to the court, jury, or officials before whom such proceeding takes place.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2021 · leading case: State v. Martinez, 946 N.W.2d 445 (Neb. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Martinez, 946 N.W.2d 445 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “The standard justification of its admissibility is a kind of estoppel or waiver theory, that a party should be entitled to rely on his opponent’s statements.”
State v. Cardona, 639 N.W.2d 653 (Neb. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “Cts. 52(I)(G) (rev. 2000) provides: [T]he appellant shall file with the district court a statement of errors, which shall consist of a separate, concise statement of each error a party contends was made by the trial court.”
State v. Garcia, 27 Neb. Ct. App. 705 (Neb. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “§ 25-2405 (Reissue 2016), a court interpreter is not required to recite an - 706 - Nebraska Court of A ppeals A dvance Sheets 27 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v.”
State v. Benito Ya, No. A-21-518 (Neb. Ct. App. Nov. 9, 2021). · cites it 2× “Our record does not reveal whether such an oath was administered at the plea hearing or sentencing. However, even if no oath was administered, Benito Ya made no objection to the hearings moving forward without such an oath.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.