Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 28
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (2026)

Sexual assault; use of electronic communication device; prohibited acts; penalties

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

(1) No person shall knowingly solicit, coax, entice, or lure (a) a child sixteen years of age or younger or (b) a peace officer who is believed by such person to be a child sixteen years of age or younger, by means of an electronic communication device as that term is defined in section 28-833, to engage in an act which would be in violation of section 28-319, 28-319.01, or 28-320.01 or subsection (1) or (2) of section 28-320. A person shall not be convicted of both a violation of this subsection and a violation of section 28-319, 28-319.01, or 28-320.01 or subsection (1) or (2) of section 28-320 if the violations arise out of the same set of facts or pattern of conduct and the individual solicited, coaxed, enticed, or lured under this subsection is also the victim of the sexual assault under section 28-319, 28-319.01, or 28-320.01 or subsection (1) or (2) of section 28-320.

(2) A person who violates this section is guilty of a Class ID felony. If a person who violates this section has previously been convicted of a covered offense as defined in section 28-1802, the person is guilty of a Class IC felony.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case: State v. Rung, 774 N.W.2d 621 (Neb. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rung, 774 N.W.2d 621 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 57× “Rung appeals his conviction for use of a computer to entice a child or a peace officer believed to be a child for sexual purposes, a violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2008).”
State v. Thomas, 303 Neb. 964 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 18× “The second count charged the offense of "Child Enticement with Electronic Communication Device," in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Knutson, 288 Neb. 823 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 24× “And we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support Knutson’s convic- tions for child abuse and child enticement for an illegal sexual purpose under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Cum. Supp. 2012).”
State v. Pischel, 762 N.W.2d 595 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 9× “Pischel appeals his conviction for use of a computer to entice a child or a peace officer believed to be a child for sexual purposes, a violation of Neb.Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2008).”
State v. Liston, 712 N.W.2d 264 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 6× “Liston has asserted constitutional challenges to the charging statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Cum. Supp. 2004).”
State v. Hines, 985 N.W.2d 625 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 2× “A jury later convicted Hines of use of an electronic com- munication device to commit sexual assault, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016), and enticement by an electronic communication device, in violation of Neb.”
Doe v. Nebraska, 734 F. Supp. 2d 882 (D. Neb. 2010). · cites it 2× “01; (h) Criminal child enticement pursuant to section 28-311; (i) Child enticement by means of an electronic communication device pursuant to section 28-320.02; (j) Enticement by electronic communication device pursuant to section 28-833; or (k) An attempt or conspiracy to…”
Doe v. Nebraska, 898 F. Supp. 2d 1086 (D. Neb. 2012). · cites it 2× “01; (h) Criminal child enticement pursuant to section 28-311; (i) Child enticement by means of an electronic communication device pursuant to section 28-320.02; (j) Enticement by electronic communication device pursuant to section 28-833; or (k) An attempt or conspiracy to…”
State v. Lamberson, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 642 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Lamberson, 921 N.W.2d 879 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Petersen, 744 N.W.2d 266 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 8× “INTRODUCTION After a bench trial in the district court for Sarpy County, Christopher Petersen was convicted of enticement of a child for sexual purposes through the use of a computer, in violation of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-320.02 (Cum. Supp. 2004).”
State v. Atchison, 730 N.W.2d 115 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” Id: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Cum. Supp. 2004) provides that a person is guilty of a Class IIIA felony where a person knowingly solicits], coaxfes], entice[s], or lure[s] (a) a child sixteen years of age or younger or (b) a peace officer who is believed by such person to be…”
Show all 21 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02(1) — 4 cases
State v. Rung, 774 N.W.2d 621 (Neb. 2009). “Rung appeals his conviction for use of a computer to entice a child or a peace officer believed to be a child for sexual purposes, a violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2008).”
State v. Knutson, 288 Neb. 823 (Neb. 2014). “And we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support Knutson’s convic- tions for child abuse and child enticement for an illegal sexual purpose under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Cum. Supp. 2012).”
State v. Lamberson, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 642 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Lamberson, 921 N.W.2d 879 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2016).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02(1)(b) — 1 case
State v. Rung, 774 N.W.2d 621 (Neb. 2009). “Rung appeals his conviction for use of a computer to entice a child or a peace officer believed to be a child for sexual purposes, a violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2008).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02(2) — 1 case
State v. Rung, 774 N.W.2d 621 (Neb. 2009). “Rung appeals his conviction for use of a computer to entice a child or a peace officer believed to be a child for sexual purposes, a violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-320.02 (Reissue 2008).”
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.