Mental incompetency of accused after crime commission; effect; capital punishment; stay of execution.
A person who becomes mentally incompetent after the commission of a crime or misdemeanor shall not be tried for the offense during the continuance of the incompetency. If, after the verdict of guilty and before judgment pronounced, such person becomes mentally incompetent, then no judgment shall be given while such incompetency shall continue; and if, after judgment and before execution of the sentence, such person shall become mentally incompetent, then in case the punishment be capital, the execution thereof shall be stayed until the recovery of such person from the incompetency.
Source:G.S.1873, c. 58, § 454, p. 823; R.S.1913, § 9098; C.S.1922, § 10123; C.S.1929, § 29-1821; R.S.1943, § 29-1822; Laws 1986, LB 1177, § 7; Laws 2015, LB268, § 13; Referendum 2016, No. 426.
Note: The changes made to section 29-1822 by Laws 2015, LB 268, section 13, have been omitted because of the vote on the referendum at the November 2016 general election.
District court has discretion to hold hearing voluntarily on mental competency of defendant to undergo sentence. State v. Saxon, 187 Neb. 338, 190 N.W.2d 854 (1971).
Insanity as a bar to the imposition of sentence presents a factual issue for the determination of the court. State v. Anderson, 186 Neb. 435, 183 N.W.2d 766 (1971).
Insanity as bar to imposition of sentence cannot be raised by habeas corpus. Sedlacek v. Hann, 156 Neb. 340, 56 N.W.2d 138 (1952).
This section imposes a duty on but does not go to the jurisdiction of the court. Sedlacek v. Greenholtz, 152 Neb. 386, 41 N.W.2d 154 (1950).
One who has become insane after the commission of a crime ought not to be tried for the offense during the continuance of the disability. Carlsen v. State, 129 Neb. 84, 261 N.W. 339 (1935).
Where insanity has not originated after commission of act, there is no requirement of trial of question of insanity. Walker v. State, 46 Neb. 25, 64 N.W. 357 (1895).