Convictions: Evidence: Appeal and Error. In
reviewing a criminal conviction for a sufficiency of the
evidence claim, whether the evidence is direct,
circumstantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the
same: An appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the
evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh
the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact. The
relevant question for an appellate court is whether, after
viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the
essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
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
Judges: Words and Phrases. A judicial abuse
of discretion exists when the reasons or rulings of a trial
judge are clearly untenable, unfairly depriving a litigant of
a substantial right and denying just results in matters
submitted for disposition.
Pleadings: Directed Verdict. A motion for
judgment of acquittal is simply another name for a motion for
directed verdict of acquittal.
Waiver. Where a defendant makes a motion for
a directed verdict at the end of the State's case,
whether ruled upon or not, and the defendant thereafter
presents evidence, the defendant has waived any error in
connection with the motion for directed verdict made at the
end of the State's case.
Criminal Law: Pleadings: Directed
Verdict. A motion for judgment of acquittal
is a criminal defendant's request, at the close of the
government's case or the close of all evidence, to be
acquitted because there is no legally sufficient evidentiary
basis on which a reasonable jury could return a guilty
Neb.App. 122] 7. Motions to Dismiss:
Directed Verdict. A motion to dismiss at the close
of all the evidence has the same legal effect as a motion for
Pleadings: Motions to Dismiss: Directed
Verdict. Whether styled as a motion for
judgment of acquittal, motion for directed verdict, or motion
to dismiss, these motions all have the same effect when used
to challenge the sufficiency of the State's evidence at
the conclusion of the State's case or the conclusion of
Witnesses: Juries: Appeal and Error. The
credibility and weight of witness testimony are for the jury
to determine, and witness credibility is not to be reassessed
on appellate review.
Convictions: Appeal and Error. In
determining whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain a
conviction in a jury trial, an appellate court does not
resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of
witnesses, evaluate explanations, or reweigh the evidence
presented to the jury, which are within the jury's
province for disposition.
Criminal Law: Motor
Vehicles: Words and
Phrases. Recklessness, for purposes of Neb. Rev.
Stat. § 60-6, 213 (Reissue 2010), has been defined as
the disregard for or indifference to the safety of another or
for the consequences of one's act.
Sentences. When imposing a sentence, the
sentencing court should customarily 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 offense. However, the sentencing court is not limited to
any mathematically applied set of factors.
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.
from the District Court for Douglas County: Shelly R.
William F. McGinn, of McGinn, Springer & Noethe, P.L.C.,
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Melissa R. Vincent
Pirtle, Riedmann, and Bishop, Judges.
Neb.App. 123] PIRTLE, JUDGE.
W. Malone appeals his convictions and sentences for motor
vehicle homicide and manslaughter in the district court for
Douglas County. He argues that the evidence was insufficient
to support guilty verdicts on the charges and that his
sentences are excessive. Based on the reasons that follow, we
March 10, 2017, Malone was charged by an amended information
with count 1, motor vehicle homicide, a Class II felony;
count 2, manslaughter, a Class IIA felony; count 3, leaving
the scene of a personal injury accident resulting in serious
bodily injury or death, a Class III felony; and count 4,
driving without an ignition interlock device, a Class I
misdemeanor. The charges arose from a traffic accident in
which Malone's car ...