Opinion ID: 1934346
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: exclusion of exculpatory polygraph examination

Text: Miller took a polygraph examination in May 1997, and deception was apparently not indicated when asked questions regarding, inter alia, his motivation behind filing the Bests' suit, the fee agreement made between him and the Bests, and his decision to withdraw his fee from the trust account. The referee sustained the NSBA's motion in limine to exclude the exculpatory polygraph results, and Miller alleges error in that ruling. The results of polygraph examinations have been held inadmissible in both criminal and administrative proceedings in Nebraska. Mathes v. City of Omaha, 254 Neb. 269, 576 N.W.2d 181 (1998). In Mathes v. City of Omaha, 254 Neb. at 273-74, 576 N.W.2d at 184, a case involving the admission of inculpatory polygraph evidence in a judicial review of a police personnel decision, we noted: Such truth and deception examinations are not favored under Nebraska law.... [C]ourts must be particularly cautious in according evidentiary status to a polygraph examination since the result `is unique in that its truth seeking functions nearly duplicate the purpose of the trial.' In accordance with our established rule of inadmissibility, we determine that the referee did not err in refusing to admit the polygraph evidence.