State v. Covey, 859 N.W.2d 558

James R. Covey was charged with felony criminal impersonation under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-638(1)(c) for knowingly providing false "personal identifying information" to a police officer; he also faced habitual criminal enhancement.
During a traffic/police contact, Covey told Officer Brueggemann his name was "Daniel Jones" while giving his true birth date; Covey then fled and was arrested; at booking he gave his real name.
There was no evidence the name "Daniel Jones" corresponded to any particular real person; the State did not prove the name identified a specific actual individual.
The trial court denied Covey's plea in abatement and motion to dismiss and granted the State's motion in limine; a jury convicted Covey of criminal impersonation and he was later sentenced as a habitual criminal.
On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether § 28-636(2)’s definition of "personal identifying information" requires that the name/number identify a specific, real person, or whether a fictitious name suffices for felony impersonation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 28-636(2) requires the false name/number to identify a specific, real person for felony impersonation under § 28-638(1)(c)	The State: statute criminalizes giving any false personal identifying information to law enforcement; the statute applies even if the information does not correspond to an actual person ("identify oneself").	Covey: statute requires the false information be capable of identifying a specific, real person; absent proof the name belonged to an actual person, the evidence is insufficient and misdemeanor false reporting would be the proper charge.	The court reversed: "personal identifying information" must be capable of identifying a specific, real human being; evidence was insufficient because no real person named "Daniel Jones" was shown.

Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 556 U.S. 646 (2009) (interpreting federal identity statutes to require proof the identifier belonged to an actual person)
U.S. v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 230 (4th Cir. 2008) (non-unique identifiers generally insufficient to identify a specific person)
U.S. v. Foster, 740 F.3d 1202 (8th Cir. 2014) (same principle regarding means of identification)
State v. Woodfall, 120 Haw. 387 (Haw. 2009) (construing personal information definitions to require real persons in context)
State v. Nissen, 224 Neb. 60 (1986) (false reporting can include providing a false name to avoid arrest)
State v. Nave, 284 Neb. 477 (Neb. 2012) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)