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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-805 (2026)

Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay

✓ 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 included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: State v. Swartz, 17 N.W.3d 174 (Neb. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Swartz, 17 N.W.3d 174 (Neb. 2025). · cites it 2× “Business records are defined in statute as [a] memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, or conditions, other than opinions or diagnoses, that was received or acquired in the regular course of business by an entity from another entity and has…”
Behm v. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., 491 N.W.2d 334 (Neb. 1992). · cites it 4× “See Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-805 (Reissue 1989) ("[h]earsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules").”
State v. Ramos, 23 N.W.3d 640 (Neb. 2025). · cites it 2×
State v. Corral, 20 N.W.3d 372 (Neb. 2025). · cites it 2× “And where the evidence is cumulative and there is other competent evidence to support the conviction, the improper admission or exclusion of evidence is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. 137 Cumulative evidence means evidence tending to prove the same point to which other…”
State v. Wilson, 406 N.W.2d 123 (Neb. 1987). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-805 (Reissue 1985) provides: “Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule proved in these rules.”
State v. Walker, 953 N.W.2d 65 (Neb. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “) [7] Walker acknowledged this rule and conceded it would otherwise qualify her statements as nonhearsay, but claims the rule does not apply because Duesman herself, who laid foundation for the record which includes the statement, did not - 309 - Nebraska Court of Appeals…”
State v. Edwards, 949 N.W.2d 799 (Neb. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “” Section 27-803(3) is based on the notion that a person seeking medical attention will give a truthful account of the history and current status of his or her condition in order to ensure proper treatment. State v. Jedlicka, 297 Neb. 276 , 900 N.”
State v. Ramos, 319 Neb. 511 (2025). · cites it 2×
Carmela H. v. Luke S., No. A-25-615 (Neb. Ct. App. May 5, 2026). · cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-805 (Cum. Supp. 2022).”
State v. Crouse, No. A-25-213 (Neb. Ct. App. May 19, 2026). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-805 (Reissue 2016). In other words, when an out-of-court statement relates the content of another out-of-court statement, there must be an independent hearsay exception for each statement.”
State v. Stricklin, No. S-14-182 (Neb. Apr. 3, 2015). · cites it 2× “As an initial matter, to qualify as a statement against penal interest under rule 804(2)(c), the statement must be self-inculpatory.”
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.