- 723 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

In re Interest of Jeovani H., a child 

under 18 years of age. 

State of Nebraska, appellee, v.

Jeovani H., appellant.

___ N.W.3d ___

Filed May 24, 2024. No. S-23-831.

1. Juvenile Courts: Appeal and Error. An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the juvenile court’s findings. When the evidence is in conflict, 

however, an appellate court may give weight to the fact that the lower 

court observed the witnesses and accepted one version of facts over 

the other.

2. Juvenile Courts. A juvenile court has broad discretion as to the disposition of a delinquent child.

3. Juvenile Courts: Minors. The foremost purpose and objective of the 

Nebraska Juvenile Code is to promote and protect the juvenile’s best 

interests, and the juvenile code must be liberally construed to serve the 

best interests of juveniles who fall within it.

4. Juvenile Courts: Restitution. In juvenile delinquency proceedings, 

orders of restitution are authorized by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) 

(Cum. Supp. 2022) when such orders are in the interest of the juvenile’s 

reformation or rehabilitation.

5. ____: ____. Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) (Cum. Supp. 

2022), a juvenile court may order restitution not only for damaged or 

stolen property, but also for medical expenses.

6. ____: ____. An appropriate restitution order serves the salutary purpose 

of making juvenile offenders understand that they have harmed not 

merely society in the abstract, but also individual human beings, and 

that they have a responsibility to the victim. But this salutary purpose 

is undermined by imposing a restitution order that the juvenile is financially unable to pay.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

07/10/2024 06:08 PM CDT
- 724 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

7. ____: ____. When a juvenile court enters an order of restitution under 

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) (Cum. Supp. 2022), it should consider, 

among other factors, the juvenile’s earning ability, employment status, 

financial resources, and other obligations.

8. Juvenile Courts: Restitution: Time. A juvenile court’s restitution order 

should contain specific requirements and time commitments as to when 

restitution must be paid and should be set in an amount that is within 

the realistic ability of the juvenile to pay within a reasonable period 

of time.

9. ____: ____: ____. A juvenile court may order that restitution be made 

immediately, in specific installments, or within a specified period 

of time.

10. Juvenile Courts: Restitution. When it is consistent with the purposes 

of the Nebraska Juvenile Code, a juvenile court may require that a 

juvenile obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy restitution 

obligations.

11. Juvenile Courts: Restitution: Records. A juvenile court’s order imposing restitution must be supported by the record, but the court may use 

any rational method to fix the amount of restitution so long as the 

amount is rationally related to the evidence offered at the dispositional 

hearing and the amount is consistent with the purposes of education, 

treatment, rehabilitation, and the juvenile’s ability to pay.

Appeal from the County Court for Hall County: Arthur S. 

Wetzel, Judge. Affirmed.

Sidnea L. Brown, Deputy Hall County Juvenile Public 

Defender, for appellant.

Anna Brokaw and Garrett Schroeder, of Hall County 

Attorney’s Office, for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Stacy, J.

In this juvenile delinquency proceeding, Jeovani H. was 

placed on probation and ordered to pay restitution as a term 

and condition of probation. He appeals that disposition, challenging only the restitution requirement. He contends the 

juvenile court erred in (1) finding him capable of paying 
- 725 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

restitution and (2) unfairly limiting the evidence adduced at 

the restitution hearing. Finding no merit to either contention, 

we affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

In 2023, the State filed a petition in the Hall County Court 

alleging that Jeovani, then 13 years old, was a juvenile as 

defined under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(2) (Reissue 2016) due 

to an act that would constitute the felony of first degree assault. 

From the record, it appears that Jeovani shoved another youth, 

causing the youth to fall and fracture his arm. Jeovani denied 

the allegations in the petition.

A few months later, pursuant to a plea agreement, Jeovani 

entered an admission to an amended petition alleging that he 

was a juvenile as defined under § 43-247(1) due to an act 

that would constitute the misdemeanor of attempted third 

degree assault. As part of the plea agreement, Jeovani agreed 

that the amount of restitution owed to his victim for medical 

expenses was $2,553.05, but Jeovani disputed his ability to 

pay that amount.

The Hall County Court, sitting as a juvenile court, accepted 

Jeovani’s admission to the amended petition and entered an 

order adjudicating him pursuant to § 43-247(1). A predisposition investigation was ordered, and the matter was set for a 

combined hearing to address disposition and restitution.

At the disposition and restitution hearing, the matter of 

restitution was addressed first. The parties confirmed on the 

record that they agreed the amount of restitution owed was 

$2,553.05, but they disagreed as to Jeovani’s ability to pay 

that amount. The court asked Jeovani’s counsel if she had 

evidence to offer, and defense counsel called Jeovani’s mother 

to testify.

1. Jeovani’s Mother

Jeovani’s mother testified that she and her husband have 

five children living in the household, including Jeovani. 

Jeovani’s mother works day shifts Monday through Friday, 
- 726 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

and Jeovani’s father works overnight shifts Thursdays through 

Sundays. Jeovani’s oldest brother, who is responsible for getting the younger siblings to school in the mornings, also works 

overnight shifts. Jeovani’s mother testified that because of current work schedules, no one in the household would be available to drive Jeovani to or from a job. She added that Jeovani 

does not have a driver’s license and that even if he were to get 

a license, the family would not have a spare vehicle he could 

use. At the end of this line of questioning, Jeovani’s counsel 

told the court, “I have no further questions.”

The prosecutor advised the court that she had no questions for Jeovani’s mother, but that she had other evidence to 

present regarding restitution. The court said, “Oh, okay. You 

may proceed with that.” Defense counsel did not object to the 

procedure, nor did she indicate to the court that she had additional witnesses or evidence on the issue of restitution. The 

State then called Jeovani as a witness, without objection or 

further discussion.

2. Jeovani

In response to questioning by the State, Jeovani testified 

that he lives with his parents and siblings. He is not responsible for paying any portion of the household bills, groceries, 

or rent. At the time of the restitution hearing, Jeovani was not 

working or actively looking for a job, but he had worked on 

a corn detasseling crew the “summer [of his] seventh grade 

year.” Jeovani could not recall how much money he earned 

detasseling, but he testified that he had no money in savings 

and did not receive an allowance. When asked if there was 

any reason he could not get a job currently, Jeovani replied, 

“[M]y parents [are] working. So [is] my brother.” But Jeovani 

admitted he had no physical disability that prevented him 

from working.

Jeovani testified that he goes to school at 7 a.m. and gets 

home around 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and he participates in wrestling and football. When asked what he does 
- 727 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

on the weekends, Jeovani said, “Go out with friends. Hang out 

with my friends.” When the State asked, “Anything else you do 

on the weekends?” Jeovani replied, “No.”

After eliciting that response, the prosecutor said, “I don’t 

have any other questions for Jeovani.” The juvenile court then 

stated, “All right. You wish to be heard?” No one replied to the 

court’s inquiry, and the State proceeded to call its final witness.

3. Probation Officer

The State called a juvenile probation officer who testified she works in Grand Island, Nebraska, and is familiar 

with employment opportunities for 14-year-old juveniles in 

that area, both during the school year and during the summer months. She testified that in addition to “odd job[s]” like 

shoveling snow, mowing lawns, and picking up yard waste, 

several fast-food restaurants were willing to hire 14-yearold juveniles. Those restaurants paid juveniles $10.50 per 

hour and were increasing the pay to $12 per hour in 2024. 

According to the probation officer, the fast-food restaurants 

allowed juveniles to work up to 171⁄2 hours per week during 

the school year, and up to 38 hours per week during the summer, including weekends.

The probation officer also testified that she was familiar 

with corn detasseling opportunities in the Grand Island area. 

She said there were two local crews that hired 14-year-old 

juveniles and one would also pick up detasselers at a local 

middle school and transport them to and from the fields. Both 

detasseling crews paid $10.50 per hour for employees with 

“no experience” and slightly more for employees with experience. Both crews were increasing the minimum hourly wage 

to $12 in 2024. One crew would allow juveniles to work up to 

230 hours during the summer season.

On cross-examination, Jeovani’s attorney asked the probation officer several questions about the assessment tool 

used by juvenile probation to estimate recidivism risk. The 

officer testified that “[having] a job does not automatically 
- 728 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

give them a point . . . to fill their free time or make . . . 

their recidivism rate lower.” Jeovani’s counsel then asked, 

“Would an afterschool activity such as wrestling or football 

be included in that free time scoring?” The officer replied, 

“Yes, that would count for a structured activity.” After these 

questions, Jeovani’s counsel advised the court that she had no 

further questions.

4. Arguments on Restitution

The court invited argument from both parties on the issue 

of restitution. The State urged the court to order restitution 

in the agreed-upon amount, and suggested that Jeovani be 

placed on a term of probation that allowed him sufficient time 

to work over the summer months and earn the money necessary to pay restitution in full. But Jeovani’s attorney urged the 

court not to impose a restitution order, arguing that Jeovani 

did not have the ability to pay restitution and suggesting that 

“putting this family in a financial bind to be able to try and 

get him to and from a job would be worse than him not being 

able to pay restitution to the victim.” Defense counsel also 

argued that Jeovani would not have time to work because he 

was planning to be “involved in wrestling, which would take 

up a tremendous amount of his time during the school year,” 

and “a good portion of his weekends.”

5. Court’s Ruling on Restitution

Before announcing his ruling, the judge spoke directly to 

Jeovani. He explained that he did not want the process of 

paying restitution to be a hardship on Jeovani or his family, 

but neither did he want the victim’s family to experience hardship, and he emphasized the importance of Jeovani’s taking 

personal responsibility for the consequences of his actions:

I just think it’s extremely important for the victim to 

feel like the system worked for them and I think it’s 

extremely important for you to make amends for the 

harm that you did. And I understand that’s going to be 
- 729 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

troublesome, but I don’t think it’s anything that’s insurmountable. I think that’s something you can do.

The judge acknowledged there may be challenges around 

transportation to and from work, but he did not think those 

were insurmountable either. The judge encouraged Jeovani to 

continue participating in organized sports while he was on probation, because he thought team sports would be “extremely 

beneficial” for Jeovani and would provide him with structure 

and a positive peer group. When Jeovani reminded the court 

that he was already participating in wrestling and might have 

practice and meets scheduled on weekends, the judge replied, 

“I understand. That’s why I’m going to give you the whole 

year to try to get this restitution [paid].”

The juvenile court then entered a dispositional order placing Jeovani on a 12-month term of probation subject to several terms and conditions, one of which was paying restitution 

in the amount of $2,553.05. It also appears from the record 

that Jeovani was expected to seek and maintain part-time 

employment while on probation. Finally, the court advised 

Jeovani that if he could “get that [restitution] all paid off . . . 

I have no problem at all with you being released [from probation] early.”

Jeovani filed this timely appeal, which we moved to our 

docket on our own motion.

II. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Jeovani assigns, restated, that the juvenile court erred in 

(1) finding him capable of paying restitution and (2) unfairly 

limiting the evidence adduced at the restitution hearing.

III. STANDARD OF REVIEW

[1] An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on 

the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the 

juvenile court’s findings. 1 When the evidence is in conflict, 

however, an appellate court may give weight to the fact that 

1 In re Interest of Seth C., 307 Neb. 862, 951 N.W.2d 135 (2020).
- 730 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

the lower court observed the witnesses and accepted one version of facts over the other. 2

IV. ANALYSIS

1. Restitution Order

In relation to his first assignment of error, Jeovani argues 

it was “improper for the juvenile court to order [him] to pay 

full restitution as he lacks the ability to pay such restitution.” 3

To address his argument, we begin by reviewing the principles that govern restitution orders in juvenile delinquency 

proceedings.

(a) Restitution Principles

[2,3] A juvenile court has broad discretion as to the disposition of a delinquent child. 4 The foremost purpose and objective of the Nebraska Juvenile Code is to promote and protect 

the juvenile’s best interests, and the juvenile code must be 

liberally construed to serve the best interests of juveniles who 

fall within it. 5 In that regard, the Legislature has expressly 

directed that the juvenile code shall be construed:

To offer selected juveniles the opportunity to take direct 

personal responsibility for their individual actions by 

reconciling with the victims, or victim surrogates when 

appropriate, through restorative justice practices and fulfilling the terms of the resulting reparation plan which 

may require apologies, restitution, community service, or 

other agreed-upon means of making amends. 6

[4,5] In juvenile delinquency proceedings, orders of restitution are authorized by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) 

(Cum. Supp. 2022) when such orders are “in the interest of 

2 In re Interest of Gunner B., 312 Neb. 697, 980 N.W.2d 863 (2022).

3 Brief for appellant at 4.

4 In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1.

5 Id.

6 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-246(4) (Cum. Supp. 2022).
- 731 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

the juvenile’s reformation or rehabilitation.” In construing 

§ 43-286(1)(a), we have said a juvenile court may order restitution not only for damaged or stolen property, but also for 

medical expenses. 7

[6,7] An appropriate restitution order “‘serves the salutary 

purpose of making the offender understand that he [or she] 

has harmed not merely society in the abstract but also individual human beings, and that he [or she] has a responsibility 

to’ the victim.’” 8 But this salutary purpose is undermined by 

imposing a restitution order that the juvenile is financially 

unable to pay. 9 As such, when a juvenile court enters an order 

of restitution under § 43-286(1)(a), it should consider, among 

other factors, the juvenile’s earning ability, employment status, 

financial resources, and other obligations. 10

[8-10] A juvenile court’s restitution order should contain 

“specific requirements and time commitments as to when restitution must be paid” and should be “‘set in an amount that 

is within the realistic ability of the [juvenile] to pay within a 

reasonable period of time, so that [the juvenile] can complete 

a probationary period, . . . and move forward.’” 11 A juvenile 

court may order that restitution be made immediately, in 

specific installments, or within a specified period of time. 12

7 In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1, 307 Neb. at 869, 951 N.W.2d at 

142 (affirming dispositional order requiring juvenile to pay restitution 

for victim’s medical bills and noting it was “essential for [the juvenile’s] 

reformation and rehabilitation, because it gives [him] the opportunity to 

take direct personal responsibility for his actions”).

8 In re Interest of Laurance S., 274 Neb. 620, 625, 742 N.W.2d 484, 489 

(2007) (quoting In re Brian S., 130 Cal. App. 3d 523, 181 Cal. Rptr. 778 

(1982)).

9 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8.

10 Id. See, also, In re Interest of Brandon M., 273 Neb. 47, 727 N.W.2d 230 

(2007).

11 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8, 274 Neb. at 625, 742 N.W.2d 

at 489 (quoting State v. Kristopher G., 201 W. Va. 703, 500 S.E.2d 519 

(1997)).

12 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8.
- 732 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

Moreover, when it is consistent with the purposes of the 

juvenile code, a juvenile court may “require that the juvenile 

obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy his or her 

restitution obligations and his or her responsibility to repay 

the victim.” 13

[11] A juvenile court’s order imposing restitution must be 

supported by the record, but the court may use any rational 

method to fix the amount of restitution so long as the amount 

is rationally related to the evidence offered at the dispositional 

hearing and the amount is consistent with the purposes of 

education, treatment, rehabilitation, and the juvenile’s ability 

to pay. 14

With these restitution principles in mind, we turn now 

to the parties’ arguments regarding Jeovani’s ability to pay 

restitution.

(b) Parties’ Arguments

Jeovani does not challenge the amount of restitution ordered, 

nor does he dispute the victim’s entitlement to restitution for 

medical expenses related to the assault for which Jeovani was 

adjudicated. Instead, Jeovani argues the juvenile court erred in 

ordering him to pay restitution because it “failed to properly 

consider [his] age, ability to pay, his family’s other obligations, and his current employment status.” 15 Jeovani points to 

evidence that he was unemployed at the time of the restitution 

hearing, and he argues that finding transportation to and from 

work would be difficult because he does not have a driver’s 

license and his parents have busy work schedules. He also 

argues that “in order to have free time to find employment [he] 

would have to quit or limit his after-school sports . . . as they 

take up much of his free time including weekends.” 16

13 Id., 274 Neb. at 626, 742 N.W.2d at 490.

14 See In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1.

15 Brief for appellant at 4.

16 Id. at 6.
- 733 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

The State disagrees. It argues there “was no credible evidence presented that would indicate [Jeovani] lacks the ability to pay, only [that he has] the desire not to as it would 

interfere with other activities.” 17 The State points to evidence 

that Jeovani has multiple job opportunities that would allow 

him to earn the money necessary to pay restitution in full 

within 12 months and still participate in school sports. And, in 

response to Jeovani’s claim that he does not have transportation to get to or from work, the State notes that he appears to 

have “ample transportation and time available for sports and 

other extra-curricular activities but not work.” 18

(c) No Error in Ordering Restitution

We begin by observing that although Jeovani was unemployed at the time of the restitution hearing, the evidence 

was undisputed that he has no disability that would limit 

employment, that he has worked detasseling previously, and 

that ample employment opportunities exist for 14-year-old 

juveniles in the Grand Island area that would allow Jeovani to 

earn at least $12 per hour working part time after school, on 

weekends, and over the summer.

On appeal, Jeovani does not dispute his ability to obtain or 

maintain part-time employment, nor does he contend that 12 

months is not a sufficient period of time to earn the money 

necessary to pay the full restitution amount. Instead, he argues 

that employment would inconvenience his parents and would 

harm, rather than further, his reformation and rehabilitation. 

We respectfully disagree.

First, to the extent Jeovani can be understood to argue that 

requiring him to pay restitution will work a hardship on his 

parents because they “do not have the time or ability to get 

him to and from employment,” 19 we think he underestimates 

his ability to arrange his own transportation. We also think 

17 Brief for appellee at 11.

18 Id.

19 Brief for appellant at 5.
- 734 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

Jeovani perhaps fails to appreciate that under Nebraska law, 

parents can be held strictly liable for medical expenses resulting from personal injury willfully and intentionally inflicted 

by their minor child. 20 So paying restitution not only allows 

Jeovani to take direct personal responsibility for the medical 

expenses incurred by the victim because of his conduct, but it 

may also reduce his parents’ exposure for such damages.

Jeovani’s primary argument on appeal is that if he is required 

to work part time and pay restitution, his participation in 

extracurricular sports will necessarily suffer. Again, we think 

Jeovani underestimates his ability to work part time and still 

participate in extracurricular sports.

We agree with the juvenile court that participation in extracurricular sports can be beneficial to youth involved in juvenile proceedings. We also agree with the juvenile court that 

it is important for Jeovani to make amends for the harm he 

caused by paying restitution to the victim. But we see nothing 

in the record that persuades us Jeovani cannot successfully 

accomplish both. Indeed, when placing Jeovani on probation, 

the judge encouraged him to continue participating in organized sports while on probation, and imposed a term of probation designed to allow sufficient time to continue in sports and 

still work part time to earn the money necessary to pay restitution. And, as additional incentive to work hard, the judge told 

Jeovani that he could be released from probation as soon as 

the restitution amount was paid in full.

Having reviewed the record de novo and carefully considered Jeovani’s earning ability, employment status, financial 

resources, and other obligations, we conclude that requiring 

him to pay restitution to his victim furthers his reformation 

and rehabilitation and provides him an opportunity to take 

direct responsibility for his actions. Moreover, we find it is 

consistent with the purposes of the juvenile code to require 

Jeovani to obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy 

his restitution obligation.

20 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-801 (Reissue 2016).
- 735 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

In sum, the record supports the conclusion that Jeovani 

has the ability to pay restitution in the agreed-upon amount 

of $2,553.05 and that he can realistically do so within the 

12-month period of his probationary term. Jeovani’s first 

assignment of error has no merit.

2. Restitution Hearing Procedure

In his second assignment of error, Jeovani argues that he 

was “not given a fair opportunity to present his own evidence 

and dispute the evidence the State was offering as to [his] ability to pay restitution.” 21 More specifically, Jeovani claims that 

his attorney “was allowed to call only one witness” and that 

when the State called Jeovani to testify, his defense counsel 

“was never given the opportunity to cross-examine” him. 22 In 

our de novo review of the record, we find no factual support 

for these claims.

The procedure followed during the hearing was somewhat 

informal, but both parties were given a fair opportunity to 

adduce evidence and examine witnesses on the issue of restitution. The court allowed Jeovani to proceed with evidence 

first. The defense called Jeovani’s mother as a witness; at 

the conclusion of the mother’s direct examination, the State 

declined the opportunity to cross-examine that witness. The 

State then called Jeovani as a witness without objection; at the 

conclusion of Jeovani’s direct examination, defense counsel 

did not respond when the court asked, “[Do you] wish to be 

heard?” Finally, the State called a juvenile probation officer 

as a witness; at the end of the officer’s direct examination, 

defense counsel asked two questions on cross-examination 

and then advised the court she had no further questions. No 

party advised the court, at any point during or after the hearing, that they had additional evidence to offer. We therefore 

reject as meritless Jeovani’s claim that he was “not allow[ed]” 

21 Brief for appellant at 4.

22 Id. at 8.
- 736 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

316 Nebraska Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.

Cite as 316 Neb. 723

an opportunity to present or cross-examine witnesses on the 

issue of restitution. 23

V. CONCLUSION

Our de novo review of the record shows that the juvenile 

court’s order to pay restitution in the amount of $2,553.05 is 

supported by the record, that it is consistent with Jeovani’s 

reformation and rehabilitation, and that Jeovani has the ability to pay the restitution within the time period allowed. 

Moreover, the record affirmatively disproves Jeovani’s claim 

that he was denied a fair opportunity to present evidence during the restitution hearing. We therefore affirm the juvenile 

court’s dispositional order.

Affirmed.

23 Id.