Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (2026)

Rule 701. Opinion testimony by lay witnesses; when

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

If the witness is not testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of his testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: State v. Rocha, 890 N.W.2d 178 (Neb. 2017).
State v. Rocha, 890 N.W.2d 178 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 3× “18 But the abolition of the ultimate issue rule does not lower the bar so as to admit all opinions, because under rules 701 and 702, opinions must be helpful to the trier of fact, and rule 403 provides an additional basis 12 § 27-403.”
Reiber v. Cnty. of Gage, 303 Neb. 325 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 2× “701, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 2016), and § 27-702.”
State v. Smith, 292 Neb. 434 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 2× “” Spizzirri testified that she had “personal experience with [that] type of a photo album,” with “peeling away the clear sheet” and “putting a photo onto the sticky backing.”
State v. Ramos, 319 Neb. 511 (Neb. 2025). · cites it 7× “Over Ramos’ objection based on Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 2016), De Los Santos testified that she identified Ramos as the second individual.”
Rodriguez v. Surgical Assocs., 298 Neb. 573 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 3× “701, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 2016), provides: If the witness is not testifying as an expert, his tes- timony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful…”
State v. Jacob, 494 N.W.2d 109 (Neb. 1993). · cites it 4× “Section 27-701 states: If the witness is not testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of his…”
State v. Archie, 733 N.W.2d 513 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “32 Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 27-701 and 27-702 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Boppre, 453 N.W.2d 406 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 1989) provides: If the witness is not testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a…”
State v. McMillion, 23 Neb. Ct. App. 687 (Neb. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “On appeal, McMillion claims that Howell’s opinions of the file creation dates were inadmissible because he is not an expert in date forgery analysis and his opinion is not appro- priate lay witness testimony under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 2008). She claims that Howell…”
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 2× “Even if floor grates and doors do not ordinarily present unreasonable risks of harm, shoelaces do not ordinarily get trapped in floor grates, doors do not ordinarily close with such force as to throw some- one to the floor, and falls do not ordinarily result in femoral 23 See…”
State v. William, 435 N.W.2d 174 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 1979). It is generally admissible where it is necessary and advisable as an aid to the jury, but it should be excluded whenever the point is reached at which the trier of fact is being told that which it is itself entirely equipped to determine.”
Simon v. Drake, 829 N.W.2d 686 (Neb. 2013). · cites it 2× “5 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-701 (Reissue 2008). 6 See Thone v.”
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.