Court Opinion

ID: 9659177
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 21:34:17.179402+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:04.726223
License: Public Domain

White, J.,
dissenting.
Without addressing the issue of confabulation that concerned us in State v. Palmer, 210 Neb. 206, 313 N.W.2d 648 (1981), the majority now retreats from the square holding in that case, that if the subject was brought up in a hypnotic session, the witness cannot be permitted to testify about the subject matter at trial. The opinion in Palmer fully explored the consequences of that holding. I am not convinced that the concerns we there expressed have now magically vanished. I would reverse.
I am authorized to state that McCown, J., joins in this dissent.