(1) Whenever a person is adjudicated to be as described in subdivision (1), (2), (3)(b), or (4) of section 43-247, his or her disposition shall be governed by the Nebraska Juvenile Code.
(2) Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically required, the court may withhold sentence of imprisonment unless, having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and the history, character, and condition of the offender, the court finds that imprisonment of the offender is necessary for protection of the public because:
(a) The risk is substantial that during the period of probation the offender will engage in additional criminal conduct;
(b) The offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most effectively by commitment to a correctional facility; or
(c) A lesser sentence will depreciate the seriousness of the offender's crime or promote disrespect for law.
(3) The following grounds, while not controlling the discretion of the court, shall be accorded weight in favor of withholding sentence of imprisonment:
(a) The crime neither caused nor threatened serious harm;
(b) The offender did not contemplate that his or her crime would cause or threaten serious harm;
(c) The offender acted under strong provocation;
(d) Substantial grounds were present tending to excuse or justify the crime, though failing to establish a defense;
(e) The victim of the crime induced or facilitated commission of the crime;
(f) The offender has compensated or will compensate the victim of his or her crime for the damage or injury the victim sustained;
(g) The offender has no history of prior delinquency or criminal activity and has led a law-abiding life for a substantial period of time before the commission of the crime;
(h) The crime was the result of circumstances unlikely to recur;
(i) The character and attitudes of the offender indicate that he or she is unlikely to commit another crime;
(j) The offender is likely to respond affirmatively to probationary treatment;
(k) Imprisonment of the offender would entail excessive hardship to his or her dependents;
(l) The offender has been abused physically, sexually, or psychologically by a family or household member as defined in section 42-903, a sexual partner, or a person who used the offender for financial gain; or
(m) The offender is a trafficking victim as defined in section 28-830.
(4) When an offender who has been convicted of a crime is not sentenced to imprisonment, the court may sentence him or her to probation.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Oldenburg (2001)
nebctapp · cites it 26×
“" (b) Counsel's Arguments At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued that the PSR incorrectly focused on Kurt's injuries and that under the statutory criteria in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995), Charlene should be considered for probation.”
State v. Gibson (2019)
neb · cites it 8×
“We agree with the Court of Appeals' majority opinion that this written sentence imposed probation in lieu of incarceration and imposed 180 days' jail time as a valid condition of probation under the authority conferred by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Garcia (2019)
neb · cites it 6×
“Garcia also argues that the court failed to explicitly analyze the factors set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) and that therefore the court "unfairly deprived Garcia of a just sentence.”
State v. Gibson (2018)
nebctapp · cites it 16×
“See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) (allowing court to impose period of probation in lieu of incarceration in certain situations).”
State v. Baxter (2017)
neb · cites it 8×
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Supp. 2015), to which refer- ence is made in § 29-2204.”
State v. Morton (2021)
nebctapp · cites it 16×
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) is a directive to the trial court as to certain factors to be considered in impos- ing the sentence, but § 29-2260 does not control the trial court’s discre- tion in its conclusion reached as to the proper sentence to be imposed, after…”
State v. Steele (2018)
neb · cites it 7×
“First, we reject Steele's argument that the district court abused its discretion by not considering certain factors set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (3) (Reissue 2016), which, he contends should have been considered as mitigating factors.”
State v. McCulley (2020)
neb · cites it 16×
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2008) does not require the trial court to articulate on the record that it has considered each sentencing factor, and it does not require the court to make specific findings as to the factors and the weight given them.”
State v. Aguallo (2016)
neb · cites it 7×
“2015) and Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Supp. 2015). - 180 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v.”
State v. Cerritos-Valdez (2017)
neb · cites it 5×
“563 [5] Additionally, when deciding if it is appropriate to with- hold a sentence of imprisonment and grant probation, a sen- tencing court is guided by the statutory grounds set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2008): (3) The following grounds, while not controlling…”
State v. Thompson (2007)
nebctapp · cites it 9×
“However, before turning to the PSI, we note that because probation rather than imprisonment was imposed, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995) is implicated.”
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb · cites it 9×
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(2) — 43 cases
State v. Gibson (2019)
neb
“We agree with the Court of Appeals' majority opinion that this written sentence imposed probation in lieu of incarceration and imposed 180 days' jail time as a valid condition of probation under the authority conferred by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Cerritos-Valdez (2017)
neb
“563 [5] Additionally, when deciding if it is appropriate to with- hold a sentence of imprisonment and grant probation, a sen- tencing court is guided by the statutory grounds set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2008): (3) The following grounds, while not controlling…”
State v. Garcia (2019)
neb
“Garcia also argues that the court failed to explicitly analyze the factors set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) and that therefore the court "unfairly deprived Garcia of a just sentence.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(2)(a) — 8 cases
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(2)(b) — 1 case
State v. Oldenburg (2001)
nebctapp
“" (b) Counsel's Arguments At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued that the PSR incorrectly focused on Kurt's injuries and that under the statutory criteria in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995), Charlene should be considered for probation.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(2)(c) — 7 cases
State v. Oldenburg (2001)
nebctapp
“" (b) Counsel's Arguments At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued that the PSR incorrectly focused on Kurt's injuries and that under the statutory criteria in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995), Charlene should be considered for probation.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3) — 33 cases
State v. Steele (2018)
neb
“First, we reject Steele's argument that the district court abused its discretion by not considering certain factors set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (3) (Reissue 2016), which, he contends should have been considered as mitigating factors.”
State v. Gibson (2018)
nebctapp
“See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) (allowing court to impose period of probation in lieu of incarceration in certain situations).”
State v. Morton (2021)
nebctapp
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 2016) is a directive to the trial court as to certain factors to be considered in impos- ing the sentence, but § 29-2260 does not control the trial court’s discre- tion in its conclusion reached as to the proper sentence to be imposed, after…”
State v. Thompson (2007)
nebctapp
“However, before turning to the PSI, we note that because probation rather than imprisonment was imposed, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995) is implicated.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(a) — 7 cases
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(d) — 2 cases
State v. Oldenburg (2001)
nebctapp
“" (b) Counsel's Arguments At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued that the PSR incorrectly focused on Kurt's injuries and that under the statutory criteria in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995), Charlene should be considered for probation.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(e) — 1 case
State v. Oldenburg (2001)
nebctapp
“" (b) Counsel's Arguments At the sentencing hearing, defense counsel argued that the PSR incorrectly focused on Kurt's injuries and that under the statutory criteria in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 29-2260 (Reissue 1995), Charlene should be considered for probation.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(f) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(h) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(3)(k) — 2 cases
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(5) — 2 cases
State v. Aguallo (2016)
neb
“2015) and Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Supp. 2015). - 180 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 294 Nebraska R eports STATE v.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(c) — 1 case
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(f) — 1 case
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(h) — 1 case
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(i) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260(k) — 1 case
State v. Hamik (2001)
neb
“Also pertinent to our analysis is Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (2) (Reissue 1995), which provides in part: Whenever a court considers sentence for an offender convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony for which mandatory or mandatory minimum imprisonment is not specifically…”
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.