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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3601 (2026)

Legislative findings

✓ 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 Legislature finds that pretrial diversion offers persons charged with criminal offenses and minor traffic violations an alternative to traditional criminal justice proceedings in that: (1) It permits participation by the accused only on a voluntary basis; (2) the accused has access to counsel for criminal offenses prior to a decision to participate; (3) it occurs prior to an adjudication but after arrest and a decision has been made by the prosecutor that the offense will support criminal charges; and (4) it results in dismissal of charges, or its equivalent, if the individual successfully completes the diversion process.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1999–2008 · leading case: Polikov v. Neth, 699 N.W.2d 802 (Neb. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Polikov v. Neth, 699 N.W.2d 802 (Neb. 2005). · cites it 11× “At issue is the constitutionality of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-3601 through 29-3609 (Cum.”
State v. Williams, 757 N.W.2d 187 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 3× “The district court affirmed the trial court's order and concluded that the plea agreement requiring Williams to attend the program was not a pretrial diversion program as contemplated by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3601 et seq. (Cum. Supp.”
Clayton v. Lacey, 589 N.W.2d 529 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 2× “Burglary is an eligible felony offense under the guidelines. The guidelines specifically state that the county attorney reserves the right *285 to reject any applicant to the program whose offense is deemed too serious for the program.”
Shaul v. Brenner, 637 N.W.2d 362 (Neb. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “§ 29-3602 (Reissue 1995) and that the Legislature’s findings contained in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3601 (Reissue 1995) show the program was to be voluntary with the accused having an opportunity for counsel prior to the decision to participate in the diversion program.”
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.