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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (2026)

Violations; penalties; investigation and enforcement

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

(1) Any person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act who violates the act is guilty of a Class IIIA felony.

(2) Any person required to register under the act who violates the act and who has previously been convicted of a violation of the act is guilty of a Class IIA felony and shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of at least one year in prison unless the violation which caused the person to be placed on the registry was a misdemeanor, in which case the violation of the act shall be a Class IIIA felony.

(3) Any law enforcement agency with jurisdiction in the area in which a person required to register under the act resides, has a temporary domicile, maintains a habitual living location, is employed, carries on a vocation, or attends school shall investigate and enforce violations of the act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1998–2023 · leading case: State v. Clemens, 300 Neb. 601 (Neb. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Clemens, 300 Neb. 601 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 5× “The State charged Clemens with a violation of SORA under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016) based on his failure to register within 3 working days after entering Nebraska, as required by Neb.”
State v. Ratumaimuri, 299 Neb. 887 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 4× “In the current proceedings, Ratumaimuri was charged with violating SORA's registration requirements, under § 29-4011(1). The State offered into evidence the record from his third degree assault conviction, which contained the determination that he was subject to SORA.”
State v. Torres, 574 N.W.2d 153 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 8× “Torres contends the sentence is excessive because the SORA, via § 29-4011, potentially increases his sentence for failing to register under the act.”
State v. Abejide, 879 N.W.2d 684 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 3× “In particular, Abejide argues that a conviction for a violation of the SORA “seeks to further punish an individual for a sex offense conviction if they [sic] do not abide by the SORA requirements.”
Doe v. Nebraska, 734 F. Supp. 2d 882 (D. Neb. 2010). · cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4011(l)(“Any person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act who violates the act is guilty of a Class IV felony.”
Bradshaw v. State, 671 S.E.2d 485 (Ga. 2008). · cites it 2× “§ 46-23-507; Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 29-4011, 28-105; Nev.Rev.”
Doe v. Nebraska, 898 F. Supp. 2d 1086 (D. Neb. 2012). · cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4011(1) ("Any person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act who violates the act is guilty of a Class IV felony.”
Shepard v. Houston, 289 Neb. 399 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 2× “49 Rather, the punishment is solely for the new offense of refusing to provide the DNA sample—even though the original offense may have been the “but for” reason for the DNA sample requirement.”
State v. Ratumaimuri, 299 Neb. 887 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 6× “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016), the State must prove that the defendant (1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act, Neb.”
State v. Anderson (Neb. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “CURRENT CASE On April 21, 2020, the State filed a complaint in the county court for Lancaster County charging Anderson with one count of “[SORA] Violation - Prior Felony,” a Class IIA felony, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (2) (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Clemens, 300 Neb. 601 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 5× “The State charged Clemens with a violation of SORA under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016) based on his failure to regis- ter within 3 working days after entering Nebraska, as required by Neb.”
State v. Clark (Neb. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 5× “On October 5, 2012, the State filed an information in the district court, charging Clark with a SORA violation, pursu- ant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (l) (Cum. Supp.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011(1) — 6 cases
State v. Ratumaimuri, 299 Neb. 887 (Neb. 2018). “In the current proceedings, Ratumaimuri was charged with violating SORA's registration requirements, under § 29-4011(1). The State offered into evidence the record from his third degree assault conviction, which contained the determination that he was subject to SORA.”
State v. Clemens, 300 Neb. 601 (Neb. 2018). “The State charged Clemens with a violation of SORA under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016) based on his failure to register within 3 working days after entering Nebraska, as required by Neb.”
Doe v. Nebraska, 898 F. Supp. 2d 1086 (D. Neb. 2012). “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4011(1) ("Any person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act who violates the act is guilty of a Class IV felony.”
State v. Ratumaimuri, 299 Neb. 887 (Neb. 2018). “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016), the State must prove that the defendant (1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act, Neb.”
State v. Clemens, 300 Neb. 601 (Neb. 2018). “The State charged Clemens with a violation of SORA under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (1) (Reissue 2016) based on his failure to regis- ter within 3 working days after entering Nebraska, as required by Neb.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011(2) — 1 case
State v. Anderson (Neb. Ct. App. 2021). “CURRENT CASE On April 21, 2020, the State filed a complaint in the county court for Lancaster County charging Anderson with one count of “[SORA] Violation - Prior Felony,” a Class IIA felony, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011 (2) (Reissue 2016).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4011(l) — 1 case
Doe v. Nebraska, 734 F. Supp. 2d 882 (D. Neb. 2010). “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4011(l)(“Any person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act who violates the act is guilty of a Class IV felony.”
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.