(1)(a) No person shall be granted custody of, or unsupervised parenting time, visitation, or other access with, a child if the person is required to be registered as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act for an offense that would make it contrary to the best interests of the child for such access or for an offense in which the victim was a minor or if the person has been convicted under section 28-311, 28-319.01, 28-320, 28-320.01, or 28-320.02, unless the court finds that there is no significant risk to the child and states its reasons in writing or on the record.
(b) No person shall be granted custody of, or unsupervised parenting time, visitation, or other access with, a child if anyone residing in the person's household is required to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act as a result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor or for an offense that would make it contrary to the best interests of the child for such access unless the court finds that there is no significant risk to the child and states its reasons in writing or on the record.
(c) The fact that a child is permitted unsupervised contact with a person who is required, as a result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor, to be registered as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act shall be prima facie evidence that the child is at significant risk. When making a determination regarding significant risk to the child, the prima facie evidence shall constitute a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. However, this presumption shall not apply if there are factors mitigating against its application, including whether the other party seeking custody, parenting time, visitation, or other access is also required, as the result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor, to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in the Nebraska Indian Child Welfare Act, no person shall be granted custody, parenting time, visitation, or other access with a child if the person has been convicted under section 28-319 or 28-320 or a law in another jurisdiction similar to either section 28-319 or 28-320 and the child was conceived as a result of that violation unless the custodial parent or guardian, as defined in section 43-245, consents.
(3) A change in circumstances relating to subsection (1) or (2) of this section is sufficient grounds for modification of a previous order.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases, 2013–2016 · leading case:
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
· cites it 96× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
Watkins v. Watkins, 829 N.W.2d 643 (Neb. 2013).
· cites it 18× “Pursuant to the plain language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1)(b) and (3) (Reissue 2008), when a person involved in a custody dispute is residing with someone who is required to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act as a result of a felony…”
Hopkins v. Hopkins (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 40× “When the grounds for modification of child custody are based on the presence of a registered sex offender residing in a home, such grounds for modification must also be analyzed under the statutory framework found in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (Reissue 2008).”
In re Interest of Danajah G. (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 35× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (2) (Reissue 2008) does not provide for any exception to or discretion in its mandatory language.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(1) — 1 case
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(1)(a) — 2 cases
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
In re Interest of Danajah G. (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (2) (Reissue 2008) does not provide for any exception to or discretion in its mandatory language.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(1)(b) — 3 cases
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
Watkins v. Watkins, 829 N.W.2d 643 (Neb. 2013).
“Pursuant to the plain language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1)(b) and (3) (Reissue 2008), when a person involved in a custody dispute is residing with someone who is required to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act as a result of a felony…”
Hopkins v. Hopkins (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
“When the grounds for modification of child custody are based on the presence of a registered sex offender residing in a home, such grounds for modification must also be analyzed under the statutory framework found in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (Reissue 2008).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(1)(c) — 1 case
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(2) — 1 case
In re Interest of Danajah G. (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (2) (Reissue 2008) does not provide for any exception to or discretion in its mandatory language.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933(3) — 3 cases
Hopkins v. Hopkins, 883 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2016).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1) (Reissue 2008) guides custody determinations when a person required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act has access to a child.”
Watkins v. Watkins, 829 N.W.2d 643 (Neb. 2013).
“Pursuant to the plain language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (1)(b) and (3) (Reissue 2008), when a person involved in a custody dispute is residing with someone who is required to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act as a result of a felony…”
Hopkins v. Hopkins (Neb. Ct. App. 2015).
“When the grounds for modification of child custody are based on the presence of a registered sex offender residing in a home, such grounds for modification must also be analyzed under the statutory framework found in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2933 (Reissue 2008).”
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.