Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (2026)

Discovery; failure to comply; effect

✓ 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

If, at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with sections 29-1912 to 29-1921 or an order issued pursuant to sections 29-1912 to 29-1921, the court may:

(1) Order such party to permit the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed;

(2) Grant a continuance;

(3) Prohibit the party from calling a witness not disclosed or introducing in evidence the material not disclosed; or

(4) Enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: State v. Henry, 875 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Henry, 875 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 5× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 2008) pro- vides that if a party fails to comply with a court’s order pursu- ant to Neb.”
State v. Sierra, 939 N.W.2d 808 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 9× “SIERRA the discovery statutes, the court may (1) order such party to permit the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed, (2) grant a continuance, (3) prohibit the party from calling a witness not disclosed or introducing in evidence the material not…”
State v. Short, 964 N.W.2d 272 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 6× “They agreed this was not standard operating procedure for a homicide detective.”
State v. Devers, 945 N.W.2d 470 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 4× “14 Balancing the probative value of evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice is within the discretion of the trial court. 15 (b) Discussion Because both of Devers’ assignments asserting error in the admission of evidence are based on relevancy and unfair prejudice, we…”
State v. Russell, 874 N.W.2d 8 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 4× “pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (3) (Reissue 2008) was also overruled.”
State v. Case, 937 N.W.2d 216 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “However, the State argued that because it had provided the evidence to Case, even if such late disclosure violated the discovery order, the proper remedy was not to exclude the evidence but to allow a continuance if Case - 846 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 304 Nebraska…”
State v. Schmidt, 562 N.W.2d 859 (Neb. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 1995) provides: If, at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with the provisions of sections 29-1912 .”
State v. Robinson, 715 N.W.2d 531 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 2× “See, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 1995); State v.”
State v. Vicars, 299 N.W.2d 421 (Neb. 1980). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 1979) states that if, at any time during the course of the proceedings, it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with orders for discovery, the court may do one of four things.”
State v. Lotter, 586 N.W.2d 591 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 2× “Lotter assigns that these actions violate § 29-1919(2); Lotter's right to effective assistance of counsel during opening statements and at trial under Neb.”
State v. Turner, 998 N.W.2d 783 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 2× “Moreover, the continuance gave the State an opportunity to disclose any exculpatory evidence before trial, and it is undisputed that the State did so. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the State’s motion to continue…”
State v. Ramos, 23 N.W.3d 640 (Neb. 2025). · cites it 3× “In the course of explaining why the denial of a continuance amounted to an abuse of discretion in that case, we made the following statement: Under § 25-1912, whether a prosecutor’s failure to disclose evidence results in prejudice depends on whether the information sought is…”
Show all 29 citing cases →
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919(2): 1 case
State v. Lotter, 586 N.W.2d 591 (Neb. 1998). “Lotter assigns that these actions violate § 29-1919(2); Lotter's right to effective assistance of counsel during opening statements and at trial under Neb.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919(3): 4 cases
State v. Henry, 875 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2016). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 2008) pro- vides that if a party fails to comply with a court’s order pursu- ant to Neb.”
State v. Devers, 945 N.W.2d 470 (Neb. 2020). “14 Balancing the probative value of evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice is within the discretion of the trial court. 15 (b) Discussion Because both of Devers’ assignments asserting error in the admission of evidence are based on relevancy and unfair prejudice, we…”
State v. Sierra, 939 N.W.2d 808 (Neb. 2020). “SIERRA the discovery statutes, the court may (1) order such party to permit the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed, (2) grant a continuance, (3) prohibit the party from calling a witness not disclosed or introducing in evidence the material not…”
State v. Batchelor, 214 N.W.2d 276 (Neb. 1974).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919(4): 2 cases
State v. Henry, 875 N.W.2d 374 (Neb. 2016). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1919 (Reissue 2008) pro- vides that if a party fails to comply with a court’s order pursu- ant to Neb.”
State v. Devers, 945 N.W.2d 470 (Neb. 2020). “14 Balancing the probative value of evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice is within the discretion of the trial court. 15 (b) Discussion Because both of Devers’ assignments asserting error in the admission of evidence are based on relevancy and unfair prejudice, we…”
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.