Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-510 — NE Code / Chapter 28 / Section 28-510
View Statute 28-510
Status: in_force

Conduct denominated theft in sections 28-509 to 28-518 constitutes a single offense embracing the separated offenses heretofore known as larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, extortion, blackmail, fraudulent conversion, receiving stolen property, and the like. An accusation of theft may be supported by evidence that it was committed in any manner that would be theft under sections 28-509 to 28-518 , notwithstanding the specification of a different manner in the indictment or information, subject only to the power of the court to insure fair trial by granting a continuance or other appropriate relief where the conduct of the defense would be prejudiced by lack of fair notice or by surprise.

Laws 1977, LB 38, § 110;

Laws 1982, LB 126, § 2.

Read in conjunction with this section, theft by unlawful taking under section 28-511 is the same offense as theft by receiving stolen property under section 28-517. State v. Miner, 273 Neb. 837, 733 N.W.2d 891 (2007).

Read in conjunction with this section, theft by unlawful taking under section 28-511 is the same offense as theft by receiving stolen property under section 28-517. State v. Miner, 273 Neb. 837, 733 N.W.2d 891 (2007).

A defendant is foreclosed from defending on the basis that his conduct supported one type of theft but that he was charged with another. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

A defendant is foreclosed from defending on the basis that his conduct supported one type of theft but that he was charged with another. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

A defendant was not denied his right to due process when he was charged with theft by deception and tried for theft by unlawful taking or disposition. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

A defendant was not denied his right to due process when he was charged with theft by deception and tried for theft by unlawful taking or disposition. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section creates a single offense of "theft" which may be committed by the violation of sections 28-509 to 28-517. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section creates a single offense of "theft" which may be committed by the violation of sections 28-509 to 28-517. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section gives adequate notice to a defendant that he may be charged with one manner of theft and convicted of theft by a different manner. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section gives adequate notice to a defendant that he may be charged with one manner of theft and convicted of theft by a different manner. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section has subsumed various forms of unlawful acquisitive behavior into a single offense of theft which may be committed by taking part in any one of several activities described in sections 28-509 to 28-517. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section has subsumed various forms of unlawful acquisitive behavior into a single offense of theft which may be committed by taking part in any one of several activities described in sections 28-509 to 28-517. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section provides that the offense of theft may be supported by evidence that it was committed via any manner described in sections 28-509 to 28-517, regardless of the manner by which the information alleges the theft occurred. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

This section provides that the offense of theft may be supported by evidence that it was committed via any manner described in sections 28-509 to 28-517, regardless of the manner by which the information alleges the theft occurred. State v. Jonusas, 269 Neb. 644, 694 N.W.2d 651 (2005).

The first sentence of this section does not purport to define but a single crime for which only one punishment may be imposed, as evidenced by the sundry statutes defining a variety of conduct as constituting thefts subjecting one to different consequences. State v. Schwab, 235 Neb. 972, 458 N.W.2d 459 (1990).

The first sentence of this section does not purport to define but a single crime for which only one punishment may be imposed, as evidenced by the sundry statutes defining a variety of conduct as constituting thefts subjecting one to different consequences. State v. Schwab, 235 Neb. 972, 458 N.W.2d 459 (1990).