(1) All parties may stipulate that the jury may be selected up to thirty-one days prior to the date of trial. The stipulation must be unanimous among all parties and evidenced by a joint stipulation to the county court.
(2) In all cases, except as may be otherwise expressly provided, the accused shall be tried by a jury drawn, summoned, and impaneled according to provisions of the code of civil procedure, except that whenever in the opinion of the court the trial is likely to be a protracted one, the court may, immediately after the jury is impaneled and sworn, direct the calling of additional jurors, to be known as alternate jurors.
(3)(a) The court may impanel up to six alternate jurors to replace any jurors who are unable to perform or who are disqualified from performing their duties.
(b) Alternate jurors must have the same qualifications and shall be selected and sworn in the same manner as any other juror.
(c) Unless a party objects, alternate jurors shall replace jurors in the same sequence in which the alternates were selected. An alternate juror who replaces a juror has the same authority as the other jurors.
(4) The alternate jurors shall take the proper oath or affirmation and shall be seated near the regular jurors with equal facilities for seeing and hearing the proceedings in the cause, and shall attend at all times upon the trial of the cause in company with the regular jurors. They shall obey all orders and admonitions of the court, and if the regular jurors are ordered to be kept in the custody of an officer during the trial of the cause, the alternate jurors shall also be kept with the other jurors.
(5)(a) The court may retain alternate jurors after the jury retires to deliberate, except that if an information charging a violation of section 28-303 and in which the death penalty is sought contains a notice of aggravation, the alternate jurors shall be retained as provided in section 29-2520.
(b) The court shall ensure that a retained alternate does not discuss the case with anyone until that alternate replaces a juror or is discharged. If an alternate replaces a juror after deliberations have begun, the court shall instruct the jury to begin its deliberations anew.
(6)(a) Each party is entitled to the following number of additional peremptory challenges to prospective alternate jurors:
(i) One additional peremptory challenge is permitted when one or two alternates are impaneled;
(ii) Two additional peremptory challenges are permitted when three or four alternates are impaneled; and
(iii) Three additional peremptory challenges are permitted when five or six alternates are impaneled.
(b) The additional peremptory challenges provided in this subsection may only be used to remove alternate jurors.
(7) In construing and applying this section, courts shall consider Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 24 and case law interpreting such rule.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case:
State v. Figures
State v. Figures (2021)
neb · cites it 5×
“15 [10,11] Case law, however, establishes that a trial court has broad discretion to discharge a juror for cause so long as the court has a legal or factual basis to believe that the juror can- not serve as an impartial juror.”
State v. Hilding (2009)
neb · cites it 8×
“Hilding acknowledges on appeal that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (2) (Reissue 2008) provides that "[i]f, before the final submission of the cause a regular juror dies or is discharged, the court shall order the alternate juror .”
State v. Huff (2017)
neb · cites it 9×
“was more properly characterized as a “discharge” under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (2) (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Nesbitt (2002)
neb · cites it 4×
“In addition, because the district court exercised its discretionary authority under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (Reissue 1995) to select alternate jurors, Nesbitt was also entitled to one additional peremptory challenge to be used during the alternate juror selection process.”
State v. Aguilar (2004)
neb · cites it 5×
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (Cum. Supp. 2002) addresses the use of alternate jurors and provides in part: The alternate jurors shall take the proper oath or affirmation and shall be seated near the regular jurors with equal facilities for seeing and hearing the proceedings in the…”
State v. Madren (2021)
neb · cites it 5×
“§ 29-2022 (Reissue 2016) states that once a case has been submitted, the jury shall have no communication with nonjurors, in order to ensure that an accused receives the right of an impartial jury and to shield the jury from improper conduct by jurors during the course of their…”
State v. Marks (2013)
neb · cites it 2×
“A just hearing was not thwarted by Marks’ absence, and his presence was not required; therefore, trial counsel was not deficient when he did not insist on Marks’ presence. Marks also alleged that his trial counsel was unaware prior to trial of evidence regarding a bullet hole in…”
State v. Marshall (2005)
neb · cites it 2×
“§ 29-2004 (Reissue 1995) provides that “[i]f, before the final submission of the cause a regular juror dies or is discharged, the court shall order the alternate juror, if there is but one, to take his place in the jury box.” The statute further provides that if there are two…”
State v. Cisneros (1995)
neb · cites it 4×
“(Reissue 1989); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-2004 (Reissue 1989). Jurors for specific trials are selected from the jury panel as required.”
State v. Sutton (2025)
neb · cites it 2×
“3 The clerk explained that, by statute, potential jurors are drawn randomly from a combined list of the county’s registered voters and its state identification card and driver’s license holders.”
State v. Menuey (1991)
neb · cites it 2×
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (Reissue 1989) provides that “alternate jurors shall also be kept with the other jurors and, except as hereinafter provided, shall be discharged upon the final submission of the cause to the jury.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004(2) — 4 cases
State v. Figures (2021)
neb
“15 [10,11] Case law, however, establishes that a trial court has broad discretion to discharge a juror for cause so long as the court has a legal or factual basis to believe that the juror can- not serve as an impartial juror.”
State v. Huff (2017)
neb
“was more properly characterized as a “discharge” under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (2) (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Hilding (2009)
neb
“Hilding acknowledges on appeal that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2004 (2) (Reissue 2008) provides that "[i]f, before the final submission of the cause a regular juror dies or is discharged, the court shall order the alternate juror .”
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.