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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-432 (2026)

Complaint, pleading, or proceeding; burden of proof

✓ 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

(1) It shall not be necessary for the state to negate any exemption or exception set forth in the Uniform Controlled Substances Act in any complaint, information, indictment, or other pleading or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding under the provisions of the act, and the burden of proof of any such exemption or exception shall be upon the person claiming its benefit.

(2) In the absence of proof that a person is the duly authorized holder of an appropriate registration or order form issued under the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, the person shall be presumed not to be the holder of such registration or form, and the burden of proof shall be upon him or her to rebut such presumption.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1985–2020 · leading case: State v. Taylor, 375 N.W.2d 610 (Neb. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Taylor, 375 N.W.2d 610 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-432 (1) (Reissue 1979) of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, Neb.”
State v. Grutell, 943 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “2d 258 (1943) (State required to plead and prove exception contained within statute defining crime); Roberts v. State, 110 Neb. 759 , 195 N.”
State v. Wyatt, 575 N.W.2d 411 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “It shall not be necessary for the state to negate any exemption or exception set forth in this article in any complaint, information, indictment or other pleading or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding under the provisions of this article, and the burden of proof of any…”
State v. Hawley, No. A-16-1057 (Neb. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2017). · cites it 2× “First, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-432 (Reissue 2016), places the burden on a defendant to produce authorization to possess a controlled substance: (1) It shall not be necessary for the state to negate any exemption or exception set forth in the Uniform Controlled Substances Act in any…”
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.