Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Dyer

Court of Appeals of Nebraska

February 7, 2017

State of Nebraska, appellee,
v.
Anthony P. Dyer, appellant.

         1. Sentences: Appeal and Error. An appellate court will not disturb a sentence imposed within the statutory limits absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court.

         2. Sentences: Probation and Parole. If a defendant is convicted of a Class IV felony, the court shall impose a sentence of probation unless there are substantial and compelling reasons why the defendant cannot effectively and safely be supervised in the community, including, but not limited to, the criteria in subsections (2) and (3) of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Supp. 2015).

         3. ___: ___. Notwithstanding the language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2204.02 (Supp. 2015), Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2260 (Supp. 2015) still requires that when considering probation versus imprisonment, the trial court must have regard for the nature and circumstances of the crime.

         4. Sentences. When imposing a sentence, a sentencing judge should consider the defendant's (1) age, (2) mentality, (3) education and experience, (4) social and cultural background, (5) past criminal record or record of law-abiding conduct, and (6) motivation for the offense, as well as (7) the nature of the offense, and (8) the violence involved in the commission of the crime.

         5. ___. The appropriateness of a sentence is necessarily a subjective judgment and includes the sentencing judge's observation of the defendant's demeanor and attitude and all the facts and circumstances surrounding the defendant's life.

         Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: John A. Colborn, Judge. Affirmed.

          Mark E. Rappl for appellant.

         [24 Neb.App. 515] Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and George R. Love for appellee.

          Moore, Chief Judge, and Riedmann and Bishop, Judges.

          RIEDMANN, Judge.

         INTRODUCTION

         Anthony P. Dyer appeals from his plea-based conviction in the Lancaster County District Court of enticement by an electronic communication device. He assigns only that the court imposed an excessive sentence. Finding no merit to his arguments on appeal, we affirm.

         BACKGROUND

         On January 28, 2016, the State filed an information charging Dyer with enticement by electronic communication device. He pled no contest to the charge. In exchange for Dyer's agreement to plead to the offense as charged, the State ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.