Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013

Rules and regulations; release of information; duties; access to public notification information; access to documents

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The Nebraska State Patrol shall adopt and promulgate rules and regulations to carry out the registration provisions of the Sex Offender Registration Act.

(2)(a) The Nebraska State Patrol shall adopt and promulgate rules and regulations for the release of information pursuant to section 29-4009.

(b) The procedures for release of information established by the Nebraska State Patrol shall provide for law enforcement and public notification using electronic systems.

(3) Information concerning the address or whereabouts of a sex offender may be disclosed to his or her victim or victims.

(4) The following shall have access to public notification information: Any agency responsible for conducting employment-related background checks under section 3 of the National Child Protection Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. 5119a; any social service entity responsible for protecting minors in the child welfare system; any volunteer organization in which contact with minors or other vulnerable individuals might occur; any public housing agency in each area in which a registered sex offender resides or is an employee or a student; any governmental agency conducting confidential background checks for employment, volunteer, licensure, or certification purposes; and any health care provider who serves children or vulnerable adults for the purpose of conducting confidential background checks for employment. If any means of notification proposes a fee for usage, then nonprofit organizations holding a certificate of exemption under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code shall not be charged.

(5) Personnel for the sex offender registration and community notification division of the Nebraska State Patrol shall have access to all documents that are generated by any governmental agency that may have bearing on sex offender registration and community notification. This may include, but is not limited to, law enforcement reports, presentence reports, criminal histories, birth certificates, or death certificates. The division shall not be charged for access to documents under this subsection. Access to such documents will ensure that a fair determination of what is an appropriate registration period is completed using the totality of all information available.

(6) Nothing in subsection (2) of this section shall be construed to prevent law enforcement officers from providing community notification concerning any person who poses a danger under circumstances that are not provided for in the Sex Offender Registration Act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case: Hopkins v. Hopkins
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hopkins v. Hopkins (2016) neb · cites it 8× “285, § 11 (codified at § 29-4013 (Cum. Supp. 2014)); Introducer’s Statement of Intent, L.”
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb · cites it 19× “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned · cites it 21× “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb · cites it 12× “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Pauly (2022) neb · cites it 5× “In support of its argument, the State pointed to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013 (5) (Reissue 2016), which provides that certain offi- cials within the State Patrol “shall have access to all documents that are generated by any governmental agency that may have bearing on sex offender…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb · cites it 5× “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
State v. Wilson (2020) neb · cites it 7× “§ 29-4013 (5) (Reissue 2016), which provides that certain officials within the State Patrol “shall have access to all documents that are generated by any governmental agency that may have bearing on sex offender registration and community notification.”
Meinders v. Weber (2000) sd · cites it 4× “2000) (providing for a risk assessment scale which is used to identify the offender's risk level; the extent of disclosure is determined by the offender's risk level); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 (Supp. 1998) (providing three levels of notification based on risk of recidivism).”
Welvaert v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb · cites it 6× “See § 29-4013. If the risk of recidivism is low, only law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender must be notified.”
McINTOSH v. Nebraska State Patrol (2007) nebctapp · cites it 4× “Specifically, he claims that the SORA instrument fails to consider § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(A), “[wjhether the conduct of the sex offender was found to be characterized by repetitive and compulsive behavior,” and § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(G), “[a]ny recent threats by the sex offender…”
Doe I v. Peterson (2021) ned · cites it 2× ““The release of information authorized by this section shall conform with the rules and regulations adopted and promulgated by the Nebraska State Patrol pursuant to section 29-4013.” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4009 (3).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(1) — 2 cases
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2) — 4 cases
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
McINTOSH v. Nebraska State Patrol (2007) nebctapp “Specifically, he claims that the SORA instrument fails to consider § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(A), “[wjhether the conduct of the sex offender was found to be characterized by repetitive and compulsive behavior,” and § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(G), “[a]ny recent threats by the sex offender…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(a) — 1 case
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b) — 4 cases
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b)(i) — 1 case
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii) — 1 case
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(A) — 1 case
McINTOSH v. Nebraska State Patrol (2007) nebctapp “Specifically, he claims that the SORA instrument fails to consider § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(A), “[wjhether the conduct of the sex offender was found to be characterized by repetitive and compulsive behavior,” and § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(G), “[a]ny recent threats by the sex offender…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(G) — 1 case
McINTOSH v. Nebraska State Patrol (2007) nebctapp “Specifically, he claims that the SORA instrument fails to consider § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(A), “[wjhether the conduct of the sex offender was found to be characterized by repetitive and compulsive behavior,” and § 29-4013(2)(b)(iii)(G), “[a]ny recent threats by the sex offender…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(c) — 1 case
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(c)(i) — 5 cases
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
Welvaert v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. If the risk of recidivism is low, only law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender must be notified.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(c)(ii) — 5 cases
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
Welvaert v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. If the risk of recidivism is low, only law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender must be notified.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(c)(iii) — 5 cases
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
McCray v. Nebraska State Patrol (2006) neb “In 2005, § 29-2264(5) was amended to provide that the setting aside of a conviction pursuant to § 29-2264(2) shall not: (h) Preclude proof of the conviction as evidence whenever the fact of the conviction is relevant to a determination of risk of recidivism under section…”
State v. Worm (2004) neb “See § 29-4013(2). If the risk is low, law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender are notified of the registry information.”
Welvaert v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. If the risk of recidivism is low, only law enforcement officials who are likely to encounter the offender must be notified.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(e) — 1 case
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(e)(i) — 1 case
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(f) — 1 case
Hopkins v. Hopkins (2016) neb “285, § 11 (codified at § 29-4013 (Cum. Supp. 2014)); Introducer’s Statement of Intent, L.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(3) — 1 case
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(4) — 2 cases
Hopkins v. Hopkins (2016) neb “285, § 11 (codified at § 29-4013 (Cum. Supp. 2014)); Introducer’s Statement of Intent, L.”
Doe v. Nebraska (2010) ned “It is only because the Nebraska State Patrol is no longer required to judge each sex offender’s risk of recidivism under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-4013 that the administrative hearing and appeal procedures no longer apply.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(5) — 3 cases
State v. Pauly (2022) neb “In support of its argument, the State pointed to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013 (5) (Reissue 2016), which provides that certain offi- cials within the State Patrol “shall have access to all documents that are generated by any governmental agency that may have bearing on sex offender…”
Hopkins v. Hopkins (2016) neb “285, § 11 (codified at § 29-4013 (Cum. Supp. 2014)); Introducer’s Statement of Intent, L.”
State v. Wilson (2020) neb “§ 29-4013 (5) (Reissue 2016), which provides that certain officials within the State Patrol “shall have access to all documents that are generated by any governmental agency that may have bearing on sex offender registration and community notification.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(c)(iii) — 1 case
Slansky v. Nebraska State Patrol (2004) neb “See § 29-4013. Generally speaking, the NSP is required to assign a notification level, based on the risk of recidivism, to every person subject to SORA.”
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.