Any person aggrieved by a statement taken from him or her which is not a voluntary statement, or any statement which he or she believes was taken from him or her in violation of the fifth or sixth amendments of the Constitution of the United States, may move for suppression of such statement for use as evidence against him or her. The suppression motion shall be filed in the district court where a felony is charged and may be made at any time after the information or indictment is filed, and must be filed at least ten days before trial, unless otherwise permitted by the court for good cause shown. When the charge is other than a felony, the motion shall be filed in the court where the complaint is pending, and must be filed at least ten days before trial or at the time of the plea to the complaint, whichever is later, unless otherwise permitted by the court for good cause shown. Unless claims of a statement being involuntary or taken in violation of the fifth or sixth amendments of the Constitution of the United States are raised by motion before trial as provided in this section, all objections to the use of such statements as evidence on these grounds shall be deemed waived, except that the court may entertain such motions to suppress after the commencement of trial when the defendant is surprised by the introduction of such statements by the state, and also the court in its discretion may entertain motions to suppress such statements when the defendant was not aware of the grounds for any such motion before the commencement of trial, or in such situations as the court deems that justice may require. In the event that the trial court entertains any such motion after the commencement of trial, the defendant shall be deemed to have waived any jeopardy which may have attached. None of the foregoing shall affect the right of the defendant to present the question of the voluntariness of the statement, or the question of whether the proper constitutional safeguards were given to any defendant either in custody or otherwise significantly deprived of his or her liberty, for the consideration of the fact finder at trial.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case:
State v. Harris, 640 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2002).
State v. Harris, 640 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2002).
· cites it 10× “Stat. § 27-404(2) (Reissue 1995), and its own prior order; and (4) failing to grant a mistrial based upon the admission of prior bad act evidence in violation of § 27-404 and its own prior order.”
State v. Faust, 660 N.W.2d 844 (Neb. 2003).
· cites it 6× “; Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-115 (Cum. Supp.2002). We review the determination whether to entertain a motion to suppress made after the commencement of trial for an abuse of discretion.”
State v. Harris, 735 N.W.2d 774 (Neb. 2007).
· cites it 4× “[7] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-115 (Reissue 1995). [8] State v.”
State v. Warren, 416 N.W.2d 249 (Neb. 1987).
· cites it 18× “With regard to the admissibility of defendant's statement, this court holds that Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-115 (Reissue 1985), although it was not raised at trial, is dispositive.”
State v. Owen, 510 N.W.2d 503 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-115 (Reissue 1989) (generally, unless claims of a statement being involuntary or taken in violation of the Fifth Amendment are raised by motion before trial, all objections to the use of such statement shall be deemed waived).”
State v. Bodtke, 363 N.W.2d 917 (Neb. 1985).
· cites it 3× “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-115 (Cum. Supp. 1984), Bodtke moved for pretrial suppression of his February 4 agreement with Farmers Mutual, claiming that the agreement was an involuntary confession and was obtained in violation of safeguards for custodial interrogation of a…”
State v. Twohig, 469 N.W.2d 344 (Neb. 1991).
· cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-115 (suppression of defendant’s statement) and 29-822 (suppression of physical evidence) (Reissue 1989).”
State v. Abdouch, 434 N.W.2d 317 (Neb. 1989).
· cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-115 (suppression of accused’s statement) and 29-822 (Reissue 1985) (suppression of physical evidence).”
State v. Gibson, 422 N.W.2d 570 (Neb. 1988).
· cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-115 (Reissue 1985) (proceedings for suppression of a statement obtained by violation of a defendant’s constitutional rights).”
State v. Staten, 469 N.W.2d 112 (Neb. 1991).
· cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-115 (Reissue 1989) (suppression of *15 accused’s statement) and Neb.”
State v. Pettit, 417 N.W.2d 3 (Neb. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Before trial and pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §29-115 (Reissue 1985), Sylvester Frank Pettit moved for suppression of his oral statements to law enforcement officers regarding a homicide which was later the basis of a manslaughter charge, Neb.”
State v. Kanarick, 598 N.W.2d 430 (Neb. 1999).
· cites it 3× “Specifically, we note that under § 29-1812, “[t]he accused shall be taken to have waived all defects which may be excepted to by a motion to quash, or a plea in abatement, by demurring to an indictment or pleading in bar or the general issue.”
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.