Sexual assault; testimony; corroboration not required.
The testimony of a person who is a victim of a sexual assault as defined in sections 28-319 to 28-320.01 shall not require corroboration.
Source:Laws 1989, LB 443, § 1; Laws 2006, LB 1199, § 13.
Testimony concerning corroboration in sexual offense cases is not rendered inadmissible under this section, but is no longer required. State v. Williamson, 235 Neb. 960, 458 N.W.2d 236 (1990).
An appellate court concluded that uncorroborated testimony would be sufficient to convict a defendant of sexual assault as defined in sections 28-319 to 28-320.01 in any case wherein the fact finder determined that such testimony was sufficient evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Luff, 18 Neb. App. 422, 783 N.W.2d 625 (2010).
A jury instruction was found to be a correct statement of the law under this section. The instructions, when taken together, advised the jury that while corroboration of the victim's testimony was not required, corroboration, or the lack thereof, could be considered by the jury in determining the weight to be given to the testimony, although the concurring opinion cautioned against routinely giving instruction at issue in this case. State v. Schmidt, 16 Neb. App. 741, 750 N.W.2d 390 (2008).