It is permissible for a law enforcement officer, who will also be called to testify, to be present during a trial, even where a sequestration order has been entered. State v. Freeman, 267 Neb. 737, 677 N.W.2d 164 (2004).
In an attorney disciplinary proceeding, the attorney's client who was also the complaining witness in the proceeding was an essential witness under subsection (3) of this section. State ex rel. NSBA v. Miller, 258 Neb. 181, 602 N.W.2d 486 (1999).
Sequestration order not violated by presence of State's psychiatrist who was not to be called as a witness at trial. State v. Ryan, 233 Neb. 74, 444 N.W.2d 610 (1989).
A psychiatrist or psychologist may be present in the courtroom in contravention of a sequestration order upon a showing that his or her presence is essential to the presentation of a party's case. State v. Jackson, 231 Neb. 207, 435 N.W.2d 893 (1989).
Defendant's request to sequester a witness who was the prosecutrix and victim, held properly denied under exception in subsection (3) hereof. State v. Eynon, 197 Neb. 734, 250 N.W.2d 658 (1977).
The general rule is that witnesses shall be excluded from a proceeding at the request of a party; this rule has certain exceptions, including a person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of its cause. In re Interest of Dennis W., 14 Neb. App. 827, 717 N.W.2d 488 (2006).