Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002

Joinder of offenses; joint trial; separate trials; when permitted; procedure

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.

(2) The court may order two or more indictments, informations, or complaints, or any combination thereof, to be tried together if the offenses could have been joined in a single indictment, information, or complaint or if the defendants, if there is more than one, are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses. The procedure shall be the same as if the prosecution were under such single indictment, information, or complaint.

(3) If it appears that a defendant or the state would be prejudiced by a joinder of offenses in an indictment, information, or complaint or by such joinder of offenses in separate indictments, informations, or complaints for trial together, the court may order an election for separate trials of counts, indictments, informations, or complaints, grant a severance of defendants, or provide whatever other relief justice requires.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 100 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case: State v. Cotton
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Cotton (2018) neb · cites it 8× “4 Instead, the joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2016), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if…”
State v. Henry (2016) neb · cites it 6× “The joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses…”
State v. Golyar (2018) neb · cites it 6× “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (1) (Reissue 2016): Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, or both, are of the same or similar…”
State v. Rocha (2013) neb · cites it 11× “Charges arise out of the same act or transaction if they are so closely linked in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of one charge cannot be related without relating details of the other charge.”
State v. Corral (2025) neb · cites it 37× “To determine if charges are “connected together” to be joinable under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (1) (Reissue 2016), courts weigh the totality of the circumstances in light of broadly construing permissive joinder to promote trial economy and judicial efficiency, considering…”
State v. Knutson (2014) neb · cites it 16× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008) controls the joinder or separation of charges for trial.”
State v. Duncan (2016) neb · cites it 8× “He argues that “if the state seeks to implicate the penalty provisions of § 28-518(7), [the subsec- tion allowing aggregation,] it must assume the risk if it fails to prove the ‘one scheme’ element.”13 Otherwise, Duncan says, “the net result is the defendant faces trial on two…”
State v. Briggs (2019) neb · cites it 4× “if the offenses charged ... are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.”
State v. Garcia (2023) neb · cites it 6× “While Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2016) presents two separate questions, there is no error under either subsection (1) or subsection (3) if joinder was not prejudicial, and a denial of a motion to sever will be reversed only if clear prejudice and an abuse of discretion…”
State v. J.K. (In Re Interest of J.K.) (2018) neb · cites it 4× “’s proceedings were joinable under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (2) (Reissue 2016) and that the court abused its discretion in denying its motion without engaging in the statutory analysis for joinder.”
State v. Schreiner (2008) neb · cites it 5× “S-07-829, Schreiner assigns that the court erred in trying the sexual assault charge at the same time as the probation violation charge, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 1995) and the due process and assistance of counsel clauses of the state and federal…”
State v. Benson (2020) neb · cites it 7× “While Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2016) presents two separate questions, there is no error under either subsection (1) or (3) if joinder was not prejudicial, and a denial of a motion to sever will be reversed only if clear prejudice and an abuse of discretion are shown.”
Show all 100 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002(1) — 26 cases
State v. Cotton (2018) neb “4 Instead, the joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2016), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if…”
State v. Golyar (2018) neb “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (1) (Reissue 2016): Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, or both, are of the same or similar…”
State v. Rocha (2013) neb “Charges arise out of the same act or transaction if they are so closely linked in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of one charge cannot be related without relating details of the other charge.”
State v. Henry (2016) neb “The joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses…”
State v. Knutson (2014) neb “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008) controls the joinder or separation of charges for trial.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002(2) — 7 cases
State v. Brehmer (1982) neb
State v. Pope (1974) neb
State v. Dominguez (2015) neb
State v. Lee (1987) neb
State v. Sawyer (2025) neb
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002(3) — 24 cases
State v. Corral (2025) neb “To determine if charges are “connected together” to be joinable under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (1) (Reissue 2016), courts weigh the totality of the circumstances in light of broadly construing permissive joinder to promote trial economy and judicial efficiency, considering…”
State v. Knutson (2014) neb “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008) controls the joinder or separation of charges for trial.”
State v. Cotton (2018) neb “4 Instead, the joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2016), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if…”
State v. Henry (2016) neb “The joinder or separation of charges for trial is governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (Reissue 2008), which states, in relevant part: (1) Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses…”
State v. Golyar (2018) neb “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002 (1) (Reissue 2016): Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment, information, or complaint in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, or both, are of the same or similar…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2002(4) — 8 cases
State v. Pope (1974) neb
State v. Evans (1990) neb
State v. Dandridge (1993) nebctapp
State v. Brehmer (1982) neb
State v. Thompson (1989) neb
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.