Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Harper

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1981No. 43070Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKrivosha, C.J.

I find that once again, I must in part concur with and in part dissent from the majority in its decision concerning the proper disposition of a case involving the commission of a first degree murder. See, State v. Holtan, 205 Neb. 314, 287 N.W.2d 671 (1980); State v. Williams, 205 Neb. 56, 287 N.W.2d 18 (1979); State v. Otey, 205 Neb. 90, 287 N.W.2d 36 (1979); State v. Peery, 205 Neb. 271, 287 N.W.2d 71 (1980); State v. Rust, ante p. 320, 303 N.W.2d 490 (1981).

I concur with the majority’s finding that the judgment of conviction should be affirmed, and likewise concur with the majority’s…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Proffitt v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. State v. WilliamsNebraska Supreme Court · 1979
  5. State v. EllisNebraska Supreme Court · 1981

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API