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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2521.02 (2026)

Criminal homicide cases; review and analysis by Supreme Court; manner

✓ 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

The Supreme Court shall within a reasonable time after July 22, 1978, review and analyze all cases involving criminal homicide committed on or after April 20, 1973. Such review and analysis shall examine (1) the facts including mitigating and aggravating circumstances, (2) the charges filed, (3) the crime for which defendant was convicted, and (4) the sentence imposed. Such review shall be updated as new criminal homicide cases occur.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1979–2009 · leading case: State v. Palmer, 399 N.W.2d 706 (Neb. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Palmer, 399 N.W.2d 706 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 18× “02 that the Legislature attempts to impose a mandate upon this court to look behind prosecutorial judgments concerning the charges to be filed, jury verdicts determining the particular degree of homicide, and then, based upon our independent findings of the facts in those…”
State v. Lotter, 586 N.W.2d 591 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 4× “The Nebraska Supreme Court's limiting interpretation of comparative review required by §§ 29-2521.02 and 29-2521.03 violates the separation of powers under Neb.”
State v. Moore, 316 N.W.2d 33 (Neb. 1982). · cites it 4× “" § 29-2521.02. "The Supreme Court shall, upon appeal, determine the propriety of the sentence in each case involving a criminal homicide by comparing such case with previous cases involving the same or similar circumstances.”
State v. Bjorklund, 604 N.W.2d 169 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 2× “(6) The trial court erred in failing to conduct a proper proportionality review pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2521.02 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Otey, 287 N.W.2d 36 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 3× “Our review of the record has convinced us that the findings of the panel are fully supported and that there are no mitigating circumstances in this case to weigh against the imposition of a sentence of death.”
State ex rel. Franklin v. Mcbride, 701 S.E.2d 97 (W. Va. 2009). “§ 46-20-104 (West 2009); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-2521.02 (2008); Nev.Rev.”
State v. Williams, 287 N.W.2d 18 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 2× “Sections 29-2521.02 and 29-2521.03, R.S. Supp.”
State v. Reeves, 604 N.W.2d 151 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 2× “See §§ 29-2521.02 to 29-2521.04 and 29-2528 (regarding duties of “the Supreme Court”).”
Reeves v. Hopkins, 871 F. Supp. 1182 (D. Neb. 1994). · cites it 4× “” Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-2521.02 (Reissue 1989).”
Palmer v. Clarke, 293 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (D. Neb. 2003). · cites it 3× “” Neb.Rev. Stat. § 29-2521.02; Palmer III, 399 N.”
Harper v. Grammer, 654 F. Supp. 515 (D. Neb. 1987). “711, now codified in applicable part in § 29-2521.02, meant that: “For all these reasons L.”
Randolph K. Reeves v. Frank X. Hopkins, No. 95-1098 (8th Cir. Feb. 8, 1996). “Because "[w]e have no basis for disputing [the Nebraska Supreme Court's] 7 We in no way intend to imply that the Nebraska Supreme Court could not, like the Mississippi Supreme Court, reconsider its somewhat cryptic assertion of authority to reweigh, perhaps along the lines of…”
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.