Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2026.01 — NE Code / Chapter 29 / Section 29-2026.01
View Statute 29-2026.01
Status: in_force

When the indictment charges an offense against the property of another by larceny, embezzlement or obtaining under false pretenses, the jury, on conviction, shall ascertain and declare in its verdict the value of the property stolen, embezzled, or falsely obtained.

Laws 1965, c. 146, § 1, p. 488.

In a theft case where a jury trial has been waived, the value of the property is one of the facts and elements of the crime to be determined by the trial judge, and this section is not applicable. State v. Reed, 228 Neb. 645, 423 N.W.2d 777 (1988).

In a theft case where a jury trial has been waived, the value of the property is one of the facts and elements of the crime to be determined by the trial judge, and this section is not applicable. State v. Reed, 228 Neb. 645, 423 N.W.2d 777 (1988).

Restitution, in a larceny case, can be ordered only if the jury determines by verdict the value of property stolen. State v. Frandsen, 199 Neb. 546, 260 N.W.2d 206 (1977).

Restitution, in a larceny case, can be ordered only if the jury determines by verdict the value of property stolen. State v. Frandsen, 199 Neb. 546, 260 N.W.2d 206 (1977).

This section not applicable where crime charged is that of receiving stolen property at a value of more than one hundred dollars. State v. McKee, 183 Neb. 754, 163 N.W.2d 434 (1969).

This section not applicable where crime charged is that of receiving stolen property at a value of more than one hundred dollars. State v. McKee, 183 Neb. 754, 163 N.W.2d 434 (1969).

Verdict of jury in larceny case must determine value of property stolen. State v. Houp, 182 Neb. 298, 154 N.W.2d 465 (1967).

Verdict of jury in larceny case must determine value of property stolen. State v. Houp, 182 Neb. 298, 154 N.W.2d 465 (1967).

Requirement that jury fix the amount obtained by false pretense in its verdict was not in effect at time of commission of offense or at time of trial. State v. Swanson, 179 Neb. 693, 140 N.W.2d 618 (1966).

Requirement that jury fix the amount obtained by false pretense in its verdict was not in effect at time of commission of offense or at time of trial. State v. Swanson, 179 Neb. 693, 140 N.W.2d 618 (1966).

In a theft case, the trial court erred in limiting the jury's consideration of value and in submitting a form of verdict which precluded a jury from making a specific finding of value and conveying that fact to the judge in its verdict. State v. Long, 2 Neb. App. 847, 516 N.W.2d 273 (1994).

In a theft case, the trial court erred in limiting the jury's consideration of value and in submitting a form of verdict which precluded a jury from making a specific finding of value and conveying that fact to the judge in its verdict. State v. Long, 2 Neb. App. 847, 516 N.W.2d 273 (1994).

Double jeopardy protection not violated where court at first trial failed to notify jury of need to ascertain value of property stolen and set aside guilty verdict ordering defendant retried although court knew of error while jury was out. Houp v. State, 427 F.2d 254 (8th Cir. 1970).

Double jeopardy protection not violated where court at first trial failed to notify jury of need to ascertain value of property stolen and set aside guilty verdict ordering defendant retried although court knew of error while jury was out. Houp v. State, 427 F.2d 254 (8th Cir. 1970).