Statutes: Appeal and Error. Statutory
interpretation is a question of law that an appellate court
resolves independently of the trial court.
Statutes: Legislature: Intent. The
fundamental objective of statutory interpretation is to
ascertain and carry out the Legislature's intent.
Criminal Law: Statutes: Legislature: Intent.
In reading a penal statute, a court must determine and give
effect to the purpose and intent of the Legislature as
ascertained from the entire language of the statute
considered in its plain, ordinary, and popular sense.
Statutes. To the extent there is a conflict between two
statutes, the specific statute controls over the general
A statute may be repealed by implication if a new law
contains provisions which are contrary to, but do not
expressly repeal, the provisions of the former law.
A legislative act which is complete in itself and is
repugnant to or in conflict with a prior law repeals the
prior law by implication to the extent of the repugnancy or
conflict. However, repeals by implication are not favored.
A statute will not be considered repealed by implication
unless the repugnancy between the new provision and the
former statute is plain and unavoidable.
from the District Court for Madison County: James G. Kube,
Chelsey R. Hartner, Chief Deputy Madison County Public
Defender, for appellant.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Nathan A. Liss for
Neb. 198] Wright, Connolly, Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, and
C. Thompson was convicted in the district court for Madison
County, Nebraska, of driving under the influence (DUI), third
offense, with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or
greater, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,
197.03(6) (Cum. Supp. 2014). He was sentenced to a period of
24 months' probation and was ordered to immediately serve
60 days in the county jail as a condition of his probation.
Thompson appeals, asserting that the district court erred in
imposing a jail term as a condition of probation. For the
reasons set forth below, we affirm.
November 30, 2014, Thompson was involved in a motor vehicle
accident in which he struck another vehicle from behind. He
was ultimately arrested and charged with DUI, third offense,
with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or greater, in
violation of § 60-6, 197.03(6). Thompson pled guilty as
charged. Following an enhancement hearing, Thompson's
conviction was enhanced to a third offense, making it a Class
sentencing, the parties agreed that probation would be
appropriate but disagreed as to whether a jail term could be
imposed as a condition of probation. Thompson argued that a
jail term could no longer be imposed as a condition of
probation for any felony because 2015 Neb. Laws, L.B. 605,
removed the provision in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2262
(Supp. 2015) that previously allowed up to 180 days in jail
as a condition of probation for felony offenses. The State
acknowledged the amendment to § 29-2262, but noted that
a jail term was arguably still available for a felony DUI,
because § 60-6, 197.03(6), which is the more specific
statute, expressly [294 Neb. 199] requires that a jail term
be imposed as a condition of probation for a felony DUI.
district court agreed with the State and found that a jail
term of 60 days was required under § 60-6, 197.03. It
imposed a period of 24 months' probation in the
Specialized Substance Abuse Supervision program with various
conditions, including 60 ...