(1) A person commits the offense of incest if he or she knowingly:
(a) Intermarries or engages in sexual penetration or sexual contact with any person who falls within the degrees of consanguinity set forth in section 28-702;
(b) Engages in sexual penetration or sexual contact with his or her stepchild who is under nineteen years of age; or
(c) Engages in sexual penetration or sexual contact with his or her adopted child or foster child.
(2) Incest is a Class III felony, except that incest with a person who is under eighteen years of age is a Class IIA felony.
(3) For purposes of this section, the definitions found in section 28-318 shall be used.
(4) The testimony of a victim shall be entitled to the same weight as the testimony of victims of other crimes under this code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
52
cases (
16 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case:
State v. Johnson, 695 N.W.2d 165 (Neb. 2005).
State v. Johnson, 695 N.W.2d 165 (Neb. 2005).
· cites it 142× “Included in the issues raised on appeal relative to the incest statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (1) (Reissue 1995), was a consideration of the correct definition of "minor" under the incest statute for acts committed against a stepchild and whether § 28-703 is…”
State v. Archie, 733 N.W.2d 513 (Neb. 2007).
· cites it 14× “CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit to Archie’s assignments of error. The judgment of the district court is, therefore, affirmed.”
State v. Hibler, 302 Neb. 325 (Neb. 2019).
· cites it 4× “01(2); one count of incest with a person under 18 years of age, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 2016); and one count of third degree sexual assault of a child, Neb.”
State v. Tucker, 301 Neb. 856 (Neb. 2018).
· cites it 2× “01 (2) (Reissue 2016) and two counts of incest with a person under 18 years of age in violation of *684 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 2008). The charges arose out of allegations by M.”
State v. Bershon, 983 N.W.2d 490 (Neb. 2023).
· cites it 4× “” The State also charged three counts of incest in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 2008), which, prior to 2015, provided that one commits incest if one “engages in sexual penetration with his or her minor stepchild.”
State v. Johnson, 670 N.W.2d 802 (Neb. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 10× “§ 28-319 (Reissue 1995), and incest (count II), in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (1) (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Lee, 304 Neb. 252 (Neb. 2019).
· cites it 2× “31 See Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 28-703 (Reissue 2016) and 28-105.”
State v. York, 770 N.W.2d 614 (Neb. 2009).
· cites it 3× “York's sister came forward with allegations of incest in August 2003. She alleged that York had subjected her to incest more than 50 times over a period of years beginning when she was 7 or 8 years old and York was between 10 and 12 years old.”
State v. Lane, 299 Neb. 170 (Neb. 2018).
· cites it 3× “STATEMENT OF FACTS Following the denial of Lane’s motion to suppress, pursuant to a plea agreement in which Lane agreed to enter a no contest plea, the State filed an amended information charging Lane with incest, a Class III felony, under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue…”
State v. Hamilton, 763 N.W.2d 731 (Neb. 2009).
· cites it 2× “[29] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 2008). [30] See § 29-4005(4)(a).”
State v. York, 731 N.W.2d 597 (Neb. 2007).
· cites it 2× “3 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 1995). 4 State v.”
State v. Gill, 297 Neb. 852 (Neb. 2017).
· cites it 2× “§ 28-319 (1)(a) (Reissue 2016), and two counts of incest, see Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (Reissue 2016). Counts I through III alleged sexual assault on or about September 21, 1996, to June 10, 2002, on T.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703(1) — 4 cases
State v. Johnson, 695 N.W.2d 165 (Neb. 2005).
“Included in the issues raised on appeal relative to the incest statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703 (1) (Reissue 1995), was a consideration of the correct definition of "minor" under the incest statute for acts committed against a stepchild and whether § 28-703 is…”
State v. Archie, 733 N.W.2d 513 (Neb. 2007).
“CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit to Archie’s assignments of error. The judgment of the district court is, therefore, affirmed.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703(2) — 6 cases
State v. Archie, 733 N.W.2d 513 (Neb. 2007).
“CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit to Archie’s assignments of error. The judgment of the district court is, therefore, affirmed.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-703(3)(a) — 1 case
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.