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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-823 (2026)

Motion to suppress; issues of fact; trial

✓ 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

Issues of fact arising on motions to suppress shall be tried by the court without a jury, in a summary manner, on affidavits or otherwise, as the court may direct. No evidence shall be suppressed because of technical irregularities not affecting the substantial rights of the accused.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1965–2024 · leading case: State v. Anderson, 10 N.W.3d 334 (Neb. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Anderson, 10 N.W.3d 334 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 2× “We generally agree with the lower courts that the material elements the State was required to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, with respect to each count charging a violation of OMC § 48-53, were that (1) the alleged code violation existed on the Yale Park property, (2) notice…”
State v. Brennen, 336 N.W.2d 79 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-823 (Reissue 1979); State v.”
State v. Putnam, 133 N.W.2d 605 (Neb. 1965). “The statute is indicative of this conclusion in stating: “Issues of fact arising on motions to suppress shall be tried by the court without a jury, in a summary manner, on affidavits or otherwise, as the court may direct.”
State v. Kohout, 251 N.W.2d 723 (Neb. 1977). · cites it 4× “The State relies on section 29-823, R.R.S.1943, which provides in part: "No evidence shall be suppressed because of technical irregularities not affecting the substantial rights of the accused.”
State v. Svendgard, 986 N.W.2d 88 (Neb. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “The operative question in Nolt was not whether the statutory violation at issue was a “service” or a “postservice” error, but, rather, whether the violation was purely ministerial and thus not subject to suppression absent a showing of clear prejudice.”
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.