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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (2026)

Appeal of sentence by prosecutor; review; considerations

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If the appeal has been properly filed, as set forth in section 29-2321, the appellate court, upon a review of the record, shall determine whether the sentence imposed is excessively lenient, having regard for:

(1) The nature and circumstances of the offense;

(2) The history and characteristics of the defendant;

(3) The need for the sentence imposed:

(a) To afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;

(b) To protect the public from further crimes of the defendant;

(c) To reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; and

(d) To provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; and

(4) Any other matters appearing in the record which the appellate court deems pertinent.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 45 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1984–2022 · leading case: State v. Gibson, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 559 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Gibson, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 559 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 16× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 2016) sets forth the factors that an appellate court is to consider when reviewing a sentence alleged to be excessively lenient.”
State v. Gibson, 302 Neb. 833 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 4× “7 In reviewing whether a sentencing court abused its discretion in imposing a sentence that was excessively lenient, we are guided by the factors set forth by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 2016), as well as by the statutory guidelines set out for the direction of the…”
State v. Harrison, 588 N.W.2d 556 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 9× “The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed Harrison’s sentences as excessively lenient, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995), and imposed consecutive sentences of imprisonment.”
State v. Thompson, 735 N.W.2d 818 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995) states in relevant part: [T]he appellate court, upon a review of the record, shall determine whether the sentence imposed is excessively lenient, having regard for: (1) The nature and circumstances of the offense; (2) The history and…”
State v. Hoffman, 517 N.W.2d 618 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 8× “In addition to our consideration of the State’s assignment of error regarding the leniency of the trial court’s sentence, we will first consider the defendant’s claim that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Cum. Supp. 1992) is unconstitutional because it requires an appellate court to…”
State v. Pauly, 972 N.W.2d 907 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 3× “25 A sentence imposed by a district court that is within the statutorily prescribed limits will not be disturbed on appeal unless there appears to be an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.”
State v. McGovern, 974 N.W.2d 595 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 5× “In reviewing whether a sen- tencing court abused its discretion in imposing a sentence that was excessively lenient, an appellate court is guided by the factors set forth by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 2016), as well as by the statutory guidelines set out for the…”
State v. Fields, 688 N.W.2d 878 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Antoniak, 744 N.W.2d 508 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “In our review to determine whether the sentence was excessively lenient, we consider factors similar to those listed above under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995), which provides in pertinent part: [T]he appellate court, upon a review of the record, shall determine whether…”
State v. Rice, 695 N.W.2d 418 (Neb. 2005). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Moore, 743 N.W.2d 375 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Jallen, 359 N.W.2d 816 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 3× “” Additionally, we note that § 29-2260(2)(a), (b), and (c) sets out factors to be considered by a sentencing judge in determining if a defendant should be imprisoned, while § 29-2260(3)(a) through (k) sets out factors to be considered in the decision to withhold imprisonment.”
Show all 45 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322(1) — 1 case
State v. Pauly, 972 N.W.2d 907 (Neb. 2022). “25 A sentence imposed by a district court that is within the statutorily prescribed limits will not be disturbed on appeal unless there appears to be an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322(2) — 1 case
State v. Thompson, 735 N.W.2d 818 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995) states in relevant part: [T]he appellate court, upon a review of the record, shall determine whether the sentence imposed is excessively lenient, having regard for: (1) The nature and circumstances of the offense; (2) The history and…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322(3)(b) — 1 case
State v. Harrison, 588 N.W.2d 556 (Neb. 1999). “The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed Harrison’s sentences as excessively lenient, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995), and imposed consecutive sentences of imprisonment.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322(3)(c) — 1 case
State v. Harrison, 588 N.W.2d 556 (Neb. 1999). “The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed Harrison’s sentences as excessively lenient, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2322 (Reissue 1995), and imposed consecutive sentences of imprisonment.”
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.