Court Opinion

ID: 9689157
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:22:13.625958+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:45.535823
License: Public Domain

Sievers, Judge,
concurring.
This case continues the strange rule in Nebraska jurisprudence which requires a defendant charged under a municipal *635ordinance to introduce into evidence the ordinance in order to gain appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict. This rule, of course, violates the fundamental precept that a defendant need not introduce any evidence, can silently require the State to meet its burden of proof, and then, if convicted, can exercise his or her constitutional right to appellate review. Nonetheless, the majority rule in State v. Buescher, 240 Neb. 908, 485 N.W.2d 192 (1992), must be followed, and I recognize my duty in that regard. Therefore, I concur in the result because it is correct as.the law now stands.