 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| John P. v. Paula P. (In re Karin P.), No. S-05-1056.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly appointed a father as a full guardian of his disabled, adult daughter, under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2620, because the father was attentive to the daughter's needs, he had a good understanding of her capabilities and special needs, he had appropriate expectations, and he was working towards her best interests.
|
|||||
| State v. Eberly, No. S-05-1008.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State met its burden of proving the emergency doctrine justified officers' warrantless entry where they arrived at defendant's home upon a report of burglary; the back door had been forced open, and because officers did not know whether any suspects or victims remained in home, they entered, found marijuana-growing operation, and obtained warrant.
|
|||||
| State v. Gunther, No. S-05-586.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's waiver of his right to counsel was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, Sixth Amendment, because counsel informed the court that defendant wanted to select and address the jury and wanted to examine and cross-examine the witnesses, and defendant acknowledged to the court that he was asking to represent himself.
|
|||||
| State v. Vasquez, No. S-05-1019.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred by modifying the county court's sentence, because the probationary condition of 90 days in jail was within the statutory guidelines and the county court did not abuse its discretion when issuing the sentence, and the reviewing court was powerless to affect the erroneous sentence modification as jeopardy had attached.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
