29-2201. Verdict of guilty; accused to be notified before sentence.
538 words·~2 min read·
/ne/chapter-29/29-2201A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Before the sentence is pronounced, the defendant must be informed by the court of the verdict of the jury, and asked whether he has anything to say why judgment should not be passed against him.
1. Nature and purpose of allocution
2. Miscellaneous
1. Nature and purpose of allocution
A defendant must be afforded a forum and the right to question the constitutional propriety of the information utilized by the sentencing judge, to present countervailing information, and to test, question, or refute the relevance of information on which the judge may rely in determining the sentence to be imposed. State v. Pereira, 284 Neb. 982, 824 N.W.2d 706 (2013).
Allocution is an opportunity to address the court, not to speak to spectators in attendance. State v. Pereira, 284 Neb. 982, 824 N.W.2d 706 (2013).
Allocution is an unsworn statement from a convicted defendant to the sentencing judge in which the defendant can ask for mercy, explain his or her conduct, apologize for the crime, or say anything else in an effort to lessen the impending sentence. State v. Pereira, 284 Neb. 982, 824 N.W.2d 706 (2013).
The time of imposition of sentence is not a public forum to be used by either a defendant or his or her attorney for that purpose. State v. Pereira, 284 Neb. 982, 824 N.W.2d 706 (2013).
A sentencing court is not required to use the specific words set out in the statute in conducting an allocution as long as defendant is afforded an opportunity to offer comments as to why judgment should not be passed against him. State v. Dethlefs, 239 Neb. 943, 479 N.W.2d 780 (1992).
Criminal defendant has a statutory right to allocution before sentencing, during which he is to be informed by court of verdict and asked whether he has anything to say why judgment should not be passed, providing an opportunity for defendant and counsel to contest any disputed factual basis for sentence. State v. Dunn, 14 Neb. App. 144, 705 N.W.2d 246 (2005).
2. Miscellaneous
Sentence vacated because defendant not present at sentencing even though his absence was by choice. State v. Ernest, 200 Neb. 615, 264 N.W.2d 677 (1978).
Error held not prejudicial. State v. Brockman, 184 Neb. 435, 168 N.W.2d 367 (1969).
Court is not required to delay imposition of sentence until statutory time for filing motion for new trial has expired. Young v. State, 155 Neb. 261, 51 N.W.2d 326 (1952).
Where record fails to show affirmatively that court, before pronouncing sentence, informed defendant that he had been found guilty, and record shows nothing to contrary, presumption is such information was given. Kopp v. State, 124 Neb. 363, 246 N.W. 718 (1933); Taylor v. State, 86 Neb. 795, 126 N.W. 752 (1910).
Section is mandatory; if not complied with, cause will be remanded. Evers v. State, 84 Neb. 708, 121 N.W. 1005 (1909); McCormick v. State, 66 Neb. 337, 92 N.W. 606 (1902).
Confinement of prisoner under sentence of death, from date of sentence to day of execution, is no part of sentence. McGinn v. State, 46 Neb. 427, 65 N.W. 46 (1895).
Judge is not limited to this one question; cannot coerce answer. Tracey v. State, 46 Neb. 361, 64 N.W. 1069 (1895).