In re Interest of Jeovani H.

- 723 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
In re Interest of Jeovani H., a child
under 18 years of age.
State of Nebraska, appellee, v.
Jeovani H., appellant.
___ N.W.3d ___
Filed May 24, 2024. 	No. S-23-831.
1. Juvenile Courts: Appeal and Error. An appellate court reviews juve-
nile cases de novo on the record and reaches its conclusions indepen-
dently of the juvenile court’s findings. When the evidence is in conflict,
however, an appellate court may give weight to the fact that the lower
court observed the witnesses and accepted one version of facts over
the other.
2. Juvenile Courts. A juvenile court has broad discretion as to the disposi-
tion of a delinquent child.
3. Juvenile Courts: Minors. The foremost purpose and objective of the
Nebraska Juvenile Code is to promote and protect the juvenile’s best
interests, and the juvenile code must be liberally construed to serve the
best interests of juveniles who fall within it.
4. Juvenile Courts: Restitution. In juvenile delinquency proceedings,
orders of restitution are authorized by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a)
(Cum. Supp. 2022) when such orders are in the interest of the juvenile’s
reformation or rehabilitation.
5. ____: ____. Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) (Cum. Supp.
2022), a juvenile court may order restitution not only for damaged or
stolen property, but also for medical expenses.
6. ____: ____. An appropriate restitution order serves the salutary purpose
of making juvenile offenders understand that they have harmed not
merely society in the abstract, but also individual human beings, and
that they have a responsibility to the victim. But this salutary purpose
is undermined by imposing a restitution order that the juvenile is finan-
cially unable to pay.
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
10/14/2026 08:37 AM CDT

- 724 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
7. ____: ____. When a juvenile court enters an order of restitution under
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a) (Cum. Supp. 2022), it should consider,
among other factors, the juvenile’s earning ability, employment status,
financial resources, and other obligations.
8. Juvenile Courts: Restitution: Time. A juvenile court’s restitution order
should contain specific requirements and time commitments as to when
restitution must be paid and should be set in an amount that is within
the realistic ability of the juvenile to pay within a reasonable period
of time.
9. ____: ____: ____. A juvenile court may order that restitution be made
immediately, in specific installments, or within a specified period
of time.
10. Juvenile Courts: Restitution. When it is consistent with the purposes
of the Nebraska Juvenile Code, a juvenile court may require that a
juvenile obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy restitution
obligations.
11. Juvenile Courts: Restitution: Records. A juvenile court’s order impos-
ing restitution must be supported by the record, but the court may use
any rational method to fix the amount of restitution so long as the
amount is rationally related to the evidence offered at the dispositional
hearing and the amount is consistent with the purposes of education,
treatment, rehabilitation, and the juvenile’s ability to pay.
Appeal from the County Court for Hall County: Arthur S.
Wetzel, Judge. Affirmed.
Sidnea L. Brown, Deputy Hall County Juvenile Public
Defender, for appellant.
Anna 	Brokaw 	and 	Garrett 	Schroeder, 	of 	Hall 	County
Attorney’s Office, for appellee.
Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke,
Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.
Stacy, J.
In this juvenile delinquency proceeding, Jeovani H. was
placed on probation and ordered to pay restitution as a term
and condition of probation. He appeals that disposition, chal-
lenging only the restitution requirement. He contends the
juvenile court erred in (1) finding him capable of paying

- 725 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
restitution and (2) unfairly limiting the evidence adduced at
the restitution hearing. Finding no merit to either contention,
we affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
In 2023, the State filed a petition in the Hall County Court
alleging that Jeovani, then 13 years old, was a juvenile as
defined under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(2) (Reissue 2016) due
to an act that would constitute the felony of first degree assault.
From the record, it appears that Jeovani shoved another youth,
causing the youth to fall and fracture his arm. Jeovani denied
the allegations in the petition.
A few months later, pursuant to a plea agreement, Jeovani
entered an admission to an amended petition alleging that he
was a juvenile as defined under § 43-247(1) due to an act
that would constitute the misdemeanor of attempted third
degree assault. As part of the plea agreement, Jeovani agreed
that the amount of restitution owed to his victim for medical
expenses was $2,553.05, but Jeovani disputed his ability to
pay that amount.
The Hall County Court, sitting as a juvenile court, accepted
Jeovani’s admission to the amended petition and entered an
order adjudicating him pursuant to § 43-247(1). A predisposi-
tion investigation was ordered, and the matter was set for a
combined hearing to address disposition and restitution.
At the disposition and restitution hearing, the matter of
restitution was addressed first. The parties confirmed on the
record that they agreed the amount of restitution owed was
$2,553.05, but they disagreed as to Jeovani’s ability to pay
that amount. The court asked Jeovani’s counsel if she had
evidence to offer, and defense counsel called Jeovani’s mother
to testify.
1. Jeovani’s Mother
Jeovani’s mother testified that she and her husband have
five 	children 	living 	in 	the 	household, 	including 	Jeovani.
Jeovani’s mother works day shifts Monday through Friday,

- 726 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
and Jeovani’s father works overnight shifts Thursdays through
Sundays. Jeovani’s oldest brother, who is responsible for get-
ting the younger siblings to school in the mornings, also works
overnight shifts. Jeovani’s mother testified that because of cur-
rent work schedules, no one in the household would be avail-
able to drive Jeovani to or from a job. She added that Jeovani
does not have a driver’s license and that even if he were to get
a license, the family would not have a spare vehicle he could
use. At the end of this line of questioning, Jeovani’s counsel
told the court, “I have no further questions.”
The prosecutor advised the court that she had no ques-
tions for Jeovani’s mother, but that she had other evidence to
present regarding restitution. The court said, “Oh, okay. You
may proceed with that.” Defense counsel did not object to the
procedure, nor did she indicate to the court that she had addi-
tional witnesses or evidence on the issue of restitution. The
State then called Jeovani as a witness, without objection or
further discussion.
2. Jeovani
In response to questioning by the State, Jeovani testified
that he lives with his parents and siblings. He is not respon-
sible for paying any portion of the household bills, groceries,
or rent. At the time of the restitution hearing, Jeovani was not
working or actively looking for a job, but he had worked on
a corn detasseling crew the “summer [of his] seventh grade
year.” Jeovani could not recall how much money he earned
detasseling, but he testified that he had no money in savings
and did not receive an allowance. When asked if there was
any reason he could not get a job currently, Jeovani replied,
“[M]y parents [are] working. So [is] my brother.” But Jeovani
admitted he had no physical disability that prevented him
from working.
Jeovani testified that he goes to school at 7 a.m. and gets
home around 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and he par-
ticipates in wrestling and football. When asked what he does

- 727 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
on the weekends, Jeovani said, “Go out with friends. Hang out
with my friends.” When the State asked, “Anything else you do
on the weekends?” Jeovani replied, “No.”
After eliciting that response, the prosecutor said, “I don’t
have any other questions for Jeovani.” The juvenile court then
stated, “All right. You wish to be heard?” No one replied to the
court’s inquiry, and the State proceeded to call its final witness.
3. Probation Officer
The State called a juvenile probation officer who testi-
fied she works in Grand Island, Nebraska, and is familiar
with employment opportunities for 14-year-old juveniles in
that area, both during the school year and during the sum-
mer months. She testified that in addition to “odd job[s]” like
shoveling snow, mowing lawns, and picking up yard waste,
several fast-food restaurants were willing to hire 14-year-
old juveniles. Those restaurants paid juveniles $10.50 per
hour and were increasing the pay to $12 per hour in 2024.
According to the probation officer, the fast-food restaurants
allowed juveniles to work up to 17½ hours per week during
the school year, and up to 38 hours per week during the sum-
mer, including weekends.
The probation officer also testified that she was familiar
with corn detasseling opportunities in the Grand Island area.
She said there were two local crews that hired 14-year-old
juveniles and one would also pick up detasselers at a local
middle school and transport them to and from the fields. Both
detasseling crews paid $10.50 per hour for employees with
“no experience” and slightly more for employees with experi-
ence. Both crews were increasing the minimum hourly wage
to $12 in 2024. One crew would allow juveniles to work up to
230 hours during the summer season.
On cross-examination, Jeovani’s attorney asked the pro-
bation officer several questions about the assessment tool
used by juvenile probation to estimate recidivism risk. The
officer testified that “[having] a job does not automatically

- 728 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
give them a point . . . to fill their free time or make . . .
their recidivism rate lower.” Jeovani’s counsel then asked,
“Would an afterschool activity such as wrestling or football
be included in that free time scoring?” The officer replied,
“Yes, that would count for a structured activity.” After these
questions, Jeovani’s counsel advised the court that she had no
further questions.
4. Arguments on Restitution
The court invited argument from both parties on the issue
of restitution. The State urged the court to order restitution
in the agreed-upon amount, and suggested that Jeovani be
placed on a term of probation that allowed him sufficient time
to work over the summer months and earn the money neces-
sary to pay restitution in full. But Jeovani’s attorney urged the
court not to impose a restitution order, arguing that Jeovani
did not have the ability to pay restitution and suggesting that
“putting this family in a financial bind to be able to try and
get him to and from a job would be worse than him not being
able to pay restitution to the victim.” Defense counsel also
argued that Jeovani would not have time to work because he
was planning to be “involved in wrestling, which would take
up a tremendous amount of his time during the school year,”
and “a good portion of his weekends.”
5. Court’s Ruling on Restitution
Before announcing his ruling, the judge spoke directly to
Jeovani. He explained that he did not want the process of
paying restitution to be a hardship on Jeovani or his family,
but neither did he want the victim’s family to experience hard-
ship, and he emphasized the importance of Jeovani’s taking
personal responsibility for the consequences of his actions:
I just think it’s extremely important for the victim to
feel like the system worked for them and I think it’s
extremely important for you to make amends for the
harm that you did. And I understand that’s going to be

- 729 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
troublesome, but I don’t think it’s anything that’s insur-
mountable. I think that’s something you can do.
The judge acknowledged there may be challenges around
transportation to and from work, but he did not think those
were insurmountable either. The judge encouraged Jeovani to
continue participating in organized sports while he was on pro-
bation, because he thought team sports would be “extremely
beneficial” for Jeovani and would provide him with structure
and a positive peer group. When Jeovani reminded the court
that he was already participating in wrestling and might have
practice and meets scheduled on weekends, the judge replied,
“I understand. That’s why I’m going to give you the whole
year to try to get this restitution [paid].”
The juvenile court then entered a dispositional order plac-
ing Jeovani on a 12-month term of probation subject to sev-
eral terms and conditions, one of which was paying restitution
in the amount of $2,553.05. It also appears from the record
that Jeovani was expected to seek and maintain part-time
employment while on probation. Finally, the court advised
Jeovani that if he could “get that [restitution] all paid off . . .
I have no problem at all with you being released [from proba-
tion] early.”
Jeovani filed this timely appeal, which we moved to our
docket on our own motion.
II. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
Jeovani assigns, restated, that the juvenile court erred in
(1) finding him capable of paying restitution and (2) unfairly
limiting the evidence adduced at the restitution hearing.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
[1] An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on
the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the
juvenile court’s findings. 1 When the evidence is in conflict,
however, an appellate court may give weight to the fact that
1 In re Interest of Seth C., 307 Neb. 862, 951 N.W.2d 135 (2020).

- 730 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
the lower court observed the witnesses and accepted one ver-
sion of facts over the other. 2
IV. ANALYSIS
1. Restitution Order
In relation to his first assignment of error, Jeovani argues
it was “improper for the juvenile court to order [him] to pay
full restitution as he lacks the ability to pay such restitution.” 3
To address his argument, we begin by reviewing the prin-
ciples that govern restitution orders in juvenile delinquency
proceedings.
(a) Restitution Principles
[2,3] A juvenile court has broad discretion as to the disposi-
tion of a delinquent child. 4 The foremost purpose and objec-
tive of the Nebraska Juvenile Code is to promote and protect
the juvenile’s best interests, and the juvenile code must be
liberally construed to serve the best interests of juveniles who
fall within it. 5 In that regard, the Legislature has expressly
directed that the juvenile code shall be construed:
To offer selected juveniles the opportunity to take direct
personal responsibility for their individual actions by
reconciling with the victims, or victim surrogates when
appropriate, through restorative justice practices and ful-
filling the terms of the resulting reparation plan which
may require apologies, restitution, community service, or
other agreed-upon means of making amends. 6
[4,5] In juvenile delinquency proceedings, orders of res-
titution are authorized by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-286(1)(a)
(Cum. Supp. 2022) when such orders are “in the interest of
2 In re Interest of Gunner B., 312 Neb. 697, 980 N.W.2d 863 (2022).
3 Brief for appellant at 4.
4 In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1.
5 Id.
6 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-246(4) (Cum. Supp. 2022).

- 731 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
the juvenile’s reformation or rehabilitation.” In construing
§ 43-286(1)(a), we have said a juvenile court may order res-
titution not only for damaged or stolen property, but also for
medical expenses. 7
[6,7] An appropriate restitution order “‘serves the salutary
purpose of making the offender understand that he [or she]
has harmed not merely society in the abstract but also indi-
vidual human beings, and that he [or she] has a responsibility
to’ the victim.’” 8 But this salutary purpose is undermined by
imposing a restitution order that the juvenile is financially
unable to pay. 9 As such, when a juvenile court enters an order
of restitution under § 43-286(1)(a), it should consider, among
other factors, the juvenile’s earning ability, employment status,
financial resources, and other obligations. 10
[8-10] A juvenile court’s restitution order should contain
“specific requirements and time commitments as to when res-
titution must be paid” and should be “‘set in an amount that
is within the realistic ability of the [juvenile] to pay within a
reasonable period of time, so that [the juvenile] can complete
a probationary period, . . . and move forward.’” 11 A juvenile
court may order that restitution be made immediately, in
specific installments, or within a specified period of time. 12
7 In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1, 307 Neb. at 869, 951 N.W.2d at
142 (affirming dispositional order requiring juvenile to pay restitution
for victim’s medical bills and noting it was “essential for [the juvenile’s]
reformation and rehabilitation, because it gives [him] the opportunity to
take direct personal responsibility for his actions”).
8 In re Interest of Laurance S., 274 Neb. 620, 625, 742 N.W.2d 484, 489
(2007) (quoting In re Brian S., 130 Cal. App. 3d 523, 181 Cal. Rptr. 778
(1982)).
9 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8.
10 Id. See, also, In re Interest of Brandon M., 273 Neb. 47, 727 N.W.2d 230
(2007).
11 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8, 274 Neb. at 625, 742 N.W.2d
at 489 (quoting State v. Kristopher G., 201 W. Va. 703, 500 S.E.2d 519
(1997)).
12 In re Interest of Laurance S., supra note 8.

- 732 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
Moreover, when it is consistent with the purposes of the
juvenile code, a juvenile court may “require that the juvenile
obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy his or her
restitution obligations and his or her responsibility to repay
the victim.” 13
[11] A juvenile court’s order imposing restitution must be
supported by the record, but the court may use any rational
method to fix the amount of restitution so long as the amount
is rationally related to the evidence offered at the dispositional
hearing and the amount is consistent with the purposes of
education, treatment, rehabilitation, and the juvenile’s ability
to pay. 14
With these restitution principles in mind, we turn now
to the parties’ arguments regarding Jeovani’s ability to pay
restitution.
(b) Parties’ Arguments
Jeovani does not challenge the amount of restitution ordered,
nor does he dispute the victim’s entitlement to restitution for
medical expenses related to the assault for which Jeovani was
adjudicated. Instead, Jeovani argues the juvenile court erred in
ordering him to pay restitution because it “failed to properly
consider [his] age, ability to pay, his family’s other obliga-
tions, and his current employment status.” 15 Jeovani points to
evidence that he was unemployed at the time of the restitution
hearing, and he argues that finding transportation to and from
work would be difficult because he does not have a driver’s
license and his parents have busy work schedules. He also
argues that “in order to have free time to find employment [he]
would have to quit or limit his after-school sports . . . as they
take up much of his free time including weekends.” 16
13 Id., 274 Neb. at 626, 742 N.W.2d at 490.
14 See In re Interest of Seth C., supra note 1.
15 Brief for appellant at 4.
16 Id. at 6.

- 733 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
The State disagrees. It argues there “was no credible evi-
dence presented that would indicate [Jeovani] lacks the abil-
ity to pay, only [that he has] the desire not to as it would
interfere with other activities.” 17 The State points to evidence
that Jeovani has multiple job opportunities that would allow
him to earn the money necessary to pay restitution in full
within 12 months and still participate in school sports. And, in
response to Jeovani’s claim that he does not have transporta-
tion to get to or from work, the State notes that he appears to
have “ample transportation and time available for sports and
other extra-curricular activities but not work.” 18
(c) No Error in Ordering Restitution
We begin by observing that although Jeovani was unem-
ployed at the time of the restitution hearing, the evidence
was undisputed that he has no disability that would limit
employment, that he has worked detasseling previously, and
that ample employment opportunities exist for 14-year-old
juveniles in the Grand Island area that would allow Jeovani to
earn at least $12 per hour working part time after school, on
weekends, and over the summer.
On appeal, Jeovani does not dispute his ability to obtain or
maintain part-time employment, nor does he contend that 12
months is not a sufficient period of time to earn the money
necessary to pay the full restitution amount. Instead, he argues
that employment would inconvenience his parents and would
harm, rather than further, his reformation and rehabilitation.
We respectfully disagree.
First, to the extent Jeovani can be understood to argue that
requiring him to pay restitution will work a hardship on his
parents because they “do not have the time or ability to get
him to and from employment,” 19 we think he underestimates
his ability to arrange his own transportation. We also think
17 Brief for appellee at 11.
18 Id.
19 Brief for appellant at 5.

- 734 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
Jeovani perhaps fails to appreciate that under Nebraska law,
parents can be held strictly liable for medical expenses result-
ing from personal injury willfully and intentionally inflicted
by their minor child. 20 So paying restitution not only allows
Jeovani to take direct personal responsibility for the medical
expenses incurred by the victim because of his conduct, but it
may also reduce his parents’ exposure for such damages.
Jeovani’s primary argument on appeal is that if he is required
to work part time and pay restitution, his participation in
extracurricular sports will necessarily suffer. Again, we think
Jeovani underestimates his ability to work part time and still
participate in extracurricular sports.
We agree with the juvenile court that participation in extra-
curricular sports can be beneficial to youth involved in juve-
nile proceedings. We also agree with the juvenile court that
it is important for Jeovani to make amends for the harm he
caused by paying restitution to the victim. But we see nothing
in the record that persuades us Jeovani cannot successfully
accomplish both. Indeed, when placing Jeovani on probation,
the judge encouraged him to continue participating in orga-
nized sports while on probation, and imposed a term of proba-
tion designed to allow sufficient time to continue in sports and
still work part time to earn the money necessary to pay restitu-
tion. And, as additional incentive to work hard, the judge told
Jeovani that he could be released from probation as soon as
the restitution amount was paid in full.
Having reviewed the record de novo and carefully consid-
ered Jeovani’s earning ability, employment status, financial
resources, and other obligations, we conclude that requiring
him to pay restitution to his victim furthers his reformation
and rehabilitation and provides him an opportunity to take
direct responsibility for his actions. Moreover, we find it is
consistent with the purposes of the juvenile code to require
Jeovani to obtain and maintain employment in order to satisfy
his restitution obligation.
20 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-801 (Reissue 2016).

- 735 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
In sum, the record supports the conclusion that Jeovani
has the ability to pay restitution in the agreed-upon amount
of $2,553.05 and that he can realistically do so within the
12-month period of his probationary term. Jeovani’s first
assignment of error has no merit.
2. Restitution Hearing Procedure
In his second assignment of error, Jeovani argues that he
was “not given a fair opportunity to present his own evidence
and dispute the evidence the State was offering as to [his] abil-
ity to pay restitution.” 21 More specifically, Jeovani claims that
his attorney “was allowed to call only one witness” and that
when the State called Jeovani to testify, his defense counsel
“was never given the opportunity to cross-examine” him. 22 In
our de novo review of the record, we find no factual support
for these claims.
The procedure followed during the hearing was somewhat
informal, but both parties were given a fair opportunity to
adduce evidence and examine witnesses on the issue of res-
titution. The court allowed Jeovani to proceed with evidence
first. The defense called Jeovani’s mother as a witness; at
the conclusion of the mother’s direct examination, the State
declined the opportunity to cross-examine that witness. The
State then called Jeovani as a witness without objection; at the
conclusion of Jeovani’s direct examination, defense counsel
did not respond when the court asked, “[Do you] wish to be
heard?” Finally, the State called a juvenile probation officer
as a witness; at the end of the officer’s direct examination,
defense counsel asked two questions on cross-examination
and then advised the court she had no further questions. No
party advised the court, at any point during or after the hear-
ing, that they had additional evidence to offer. We therefore
reject as meritless Jeovani’s claim that he was “not allow[ed]”
21 Brief for appellant at 4.
22 Id. at 8.

- 736 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
316 Nebraska Reports
IN RE INTEREST OF JEOVANI H.
Cite as 316 Neb. 723
an opportunity to present or cross-examine witnesses on the
issue of restitution. 23
V. CONCLUSION
Our de novo review of the record shows that the juvenile
court’s order to pay restitution in the amount of $2,553.05 is
supported by the record, that it is consistent with Jeovani’s
reformation and rehabilitation, and that Jeovani has the abil-
ity to pay the restitution within the time period allowed.
Moreover, the record affirmatively disproves Jeovani’s claim
that he was denied a fair opportunity to present evidence dur-
ing the restitution hearing. We therefore affirm the juvenile
court’s dispositional order.
Affirmed.
23 Id.