State v. Yah

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed Yah's conviction for obstructing the administration of law under the Omaha ordinance. It held that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, permitted a rational fact finder to infer that Yah intended to obstruct officers from their official duties based on his repeated refusals to follow commands, approach with an agitated dog, and retrieval of the backpack. The court also held that the county court did not improperly apply the elements of a different state statute and declined to consider constitutional arguments that were not preserved.