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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-802 (2026)

Rule 802. Hearsay rule

✓ 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

Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by these rules, by other rules adopted by the statutes of the State of Nebraska, or by the discovery rules of the Supreme Court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 88 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: State v. Hibler, 923 N.W.2d 398 (Neb. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hibler, 923 N.W.2d 398 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 6× “to Hibler include: “Just [t]ell the truth”; “Stop trying to save your own skin”; “Trust is earned but not by lies and secrets”; “You did this, you made the choices”; and “Stop playing the victim and tell the truth.”
Transcanada Keystone Pipeline, LP v. Dunavan (In Re Application No. Op-0003), 932 N.W.2d 653 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-802 (Reissue 2016). See State ex rel.”
Walton v. PATIL, 783 N.W.2d 438 (Neb. 2010). · cites it 10× “In so concluding, we reasoned that the court had no power, pursuant to Neb.Rev. Stat. §§ 27-802 and 25-1273.01 (Reissue 1989), to create in the Nebraska discovery rules an independent exception to the hearsay prohibition of § 27-802.”
State v. Sheets, 618 N.W.2d 117 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 8× “ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR Rephrased, Sheets assigns that the district court erred in (1) admitting the tapes of Barnett's confession in violation of Neb. Rev.Stat. § 27-802 (Reissue 1995), § 27-804, and Sheets' right to confront witnesses against him, pursuant to Neb.”
State v. Sierra, 939 N.W.2d 808 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 3× “Sierra does not assign error to the admission of exhibits 1 and 23. The photographs in exhibit 1 depict a person exiting the York Walmart with Mally and then that person and Mally getting into separate vehicles in the parking lot.”
State v. Smith, 873 N.W.2d 169 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 2× “802, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-802 (Reissue 2008). - 457 - Nebraska A dvance Sheets 292 Nebraska R eports STATE v.”
State v. Burries, 900 N.W.2d 483 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “803(1),90 the rule against hearsay does not exclude a “statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.”
State v. Epp, 773 N.W.2d 356 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 2× “802, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-802 (Reissue 2008). Epp asserts that the testimonies of Blessing and Forney are admissible under the residual hearsay exception.”
State v. McCurry, 891 N.W.2d 663 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “None of the other Nebraska Rules of Evidence or other Nebraska statutes authorize admissibility of a wit- ness’ pretrial identification of a defendant as a nonhearsay statement or statement otherwise exempted or excluded from the operation and purview of the “hearsay rule,” Rule…”
State v. Gutierrez, 726 N.W.2d 542 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “802, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-802 (Cum. Supp. 2006).”
State v. Childs, 960 N.W.2d 585 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 2× “No Error in Denying Directed Verdict Jean moved for a directed verdict at the close of the State’s evidence, and she presented no evidence after the motion was - 438 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 309 Nebraska Reports STATE v.”
State v. Jedlicka, 900 N.W.2d 454 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “” We stated that the fundamental inquiry to determine whether state- ments, made by a declarant who knew law enforcement was listening, had a medical purpose is “‘[i]f the challenged state- ment has some value in diagnosis or treatment, [because] the patient would still have the…”
Show all 88 citing cases →
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.