State v. Nguyen, 881 N.W.2d 566

On June 30, 2014, Nguyen was stopped for a traffic violation; a search yielded methamphetamine and a stiletto knife with a 3 3/4-inch blade concealed in the vehicle visor.
Nguyen pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine; he proceeded to a stipulated bench trial on the concealed-weapon charge.
The sole legal issue at trial was whether the knife was a "deadly weapon per se" under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1202 after a 2009 statutory amendment and thus whether proof of intent to use it as a deadly weapon was required.
The district court found the knife met the statutory definition of "knife" in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-1201(5) (blade over 3.5 inches) and convicted Nguyen of carrying a concealed weapon.
The Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed; Nguyen sought further review arguing Williams and Valencia require proof of intent to use the knife as a deadly weapon regardless of blade length.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State must prove intent to use a knife as a deadly weapon when the blade exceeds 3.5 inches	Nguyen: Williams and Valencia require proof of intended use for non-enumerated or large knives	State: 2009 amendments classify knives over 3.5" as per se deadly weapons, so intent is immaterial	The 2009 amendment and § 28-1201(5) make any knife with blade >3.5" a deadly weapon per se; intent need not be proved

State v. Williams, 218 Neb. 57 (court must instruct jury that non-per-se weapons require proof of intent to use as deadly weapon)
State v. Valencia, 205 Neb. 719 (term "deadly weapon" requires proof of manner or intended use for catchall items; whether an object is a deadly weapon is a question of fact)
State v. Bottolfson, 259 Neb. 470 (interpreting statutory definition of "knife" and holding knives over 3.5" are per se deadly weapons for relevant offenses)