Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 27
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (2026)

Rule 410. Guilty plea; nolo contendere; offered plea; withdrawn plea; inadmissible; exceptions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn, or a plea of nolo contendere, or of an offer to plead guilty or nolo contendere to the crime charged or any other crime, or of statements made in connection with any of the foregoing pleas or offers, is not admissible in any civil or criminal action, case, or proceeding against the person who made the plea or offer. This rule shall not apply to the introduction of voluntary and reliable statements made in court on the record in connection with any of the foregoing pleas or offers when offered for impeachment purposes or in a subsequent prosecution of the declarant for perjury or false statement.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: State v. Jenkins, 303 Neb. 676 (Neb. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Jenkins, 303 Neb. 676 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 2× “410, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 2016). See State v.”
State v. Klappal, 355 N.W.2d 221 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 6× “He cites Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 1979) as authority for the proposition that a withdrawn guilty plea “is not admissible in any civil or criminal action.”
State v. Methe, 422 N.W.2d 803 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 3× “Except under certain circumstances not relevant here, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 1985) stands for the proposition that a defendant’s plea of nolo contendere or a defendant’s statements made in connection with such a plea are inadmissible in any civil or criminal action,…”
Verle O. v. Mental Health Bd., 691 N.W.2d 177 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “410, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 1995), provides that evidence of a defendant’s plea of or offer of a plea of nolo contendere, and evidence of statements made in connection with such a plea or offer, are not admissible in any civil or criminal action, case, or proceeding…”
Schaefer v. McCreary, 345 N.W.2d 821 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 2× “Appellants acknowledge that under some circumstances a plea of guilty entered by a defendant in a criminal action may be used against him as an admission in a subsequent action involving the same subject matter.”
In Re Interest of Verle O., 13 Neb. Ct. App. 256 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “410, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 1995), provides that evidence of a defendant's plea of or offer of a plea of nolo contendere, and evidence of statements made in connection with such a plea or offer, are not admissible in any civil or criminal action, case, or proceeding…”
Hansen v. Marr, 594 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (D. Neb. 2009). “” Claim Three: Petitioner’s conviction was obtained by a plea of no contest which was unlawfully induced or not made voluntarily with the understanding of the nature of the charge and the consequences of the plea because language found in Nebraska Revised Statutes § 27-410…”
Hensley v. State, 573 N.E.2d 913 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991). “2d 221 , which stated that Neb.Rev. Stat. § 27-410, an adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence, is merely an evidentiary rule and does not apply to sentencing.”
In re Guardianship of Kyoko R. (Neb. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “The Guardians argue that the alleged misdemeanor conviction for solicitation of prostitution was relevant to show Marcia’s unfitness to parent Kyoko which was the issue in the proceeding and was other allowable under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 2016). Section 27-410…”
In re Interest of Te'Jon W. (Neb. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 5× “Randi objected, arguing that the exhibit was inadmissible under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-410 (Reissue 2016) because it was evidence of a no contest plea.”
State v. Jenkins, 303 Neb. 676 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 2× “This rule shall not apply to the introduc- tion of voluntary and reliable statements made in court on the record in connection with any of the foregoing pleas or offers when offered for impeachment purposes or in a subsequent prosecution of the declarant for perjury or false…”
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.