Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: STEVEN D. BURNS, Judge.
Dennis R. Keefe, Lancaster County Public Defender, and Shawn Elliott for appellant.
Jon Bruning, Attorney General, and Carrie A. Thober for appellee.
Inbody, Chief Judge, and Irwin and Pirtle, Judges.
Syllabus by the Court
1. Sentences: Prior Convictions: Habitual Criminals. Anyone who has been twice convicted of a crime, sentenced, and committed to prison, in Nebraska or any other state or by the United States, for terms of not less than 1 year each shall, upon conviction of a felony committed in Nebraska, be deemed to be a habitual criminal.
2 Habitual Criminals: Indictments and Informations. When punishment of an accused as a habitual criminal is sought, the facts with reference thereto shall be charged in the indictment or information which contains the charge of the felony upon which the accused is prosecuted.
3 Sentences: Prior Convictions: Habitual Criminals. The statutory provisions concerning habitual criminals do not create a new or separate offense, but provide merely that the repetition of criminal behavior aggravates guilt and justifies a greater punishment than would otherwise be considered.
4 Sentences: Prior Convictions: Habitual Criminals: Indictments and Informations. The essential allegations which an information must contain to sufficiently set forth a charge that a defendant is a habitual criminal are that the defendant has been (1) twice previously convicted of a crime, (2) sentenced, and (3) committed to prison for terms of not less than 1 year each.
[21 Neb.App. 783] I. INTRODUCTION
Ronnie Dubray, Jr., appeals an order of the district court for Lancaster County, Nebraska, allowing the State to amend the information related to a habitual criminal charge at the habitual criminal hearing. On appeal, Dubray asserts that it was error to allow amendment of the information at that point and that the court erred in failing to specifically rule on the admissibility of one of four prior offenses proffered by the State to demonstrate that Dubray is a habitual criminal. We find that the allowed amendment concerned only historical facts and not ...