Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Hood

Supreme Court of Nebraska

September 9, 2016

State of Nebraska, appellee,
v.
Edward Hood, appellant.

         1. Judgments: Speedy Trial: Appeal and Error.

         Generally, a trial court's determination as to whether charges should be dismissed on speedy trial grounds is a factual question which will be affirmed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.

         2. Statutes: Appeal and Error.

         Statutory interpretation presents a question of law, which an appellate court reviews independently of the lower court's determination.

         3. Speedy Trial.

         Nebraska's speedy trial statutes provide in part that every person indicted or informed against for any offense shall be brought to trial within 6 months.

4.___. In computing whether a trial is timely, certain periods of delay are excluded from the calculation, including the time from filing until final disposition of pretrial motions of the defendant, including motions to suppress evidence.

         5. Speedy Trial: Motions to Suppress.

         Determination of whether the speedy trial clock is tolled during the State's interlocutory appeal from a suppression order does not turn on whether the appeal was successful or why it was dismissed, but, rather, on whether it was authorized.

         6. Speedy Trial.

         When the State is statutorily authorized to take an interlocutory appeal from a district court's order granting a defendant's pretrial motion in a criminal case, then such an appeal is an expected and reasonable consequence of the defendant's motion and the time attributable to the appeal, regardless of the course the appeal takes, is properly excluded from the speedy trial computation under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(a) (Cum. Supp. 2014).

         7. Motions to Suppress: Speedy Trial: Appeal and Error.

         Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-824 (Reissue 2008) expressly authorizes the State to appeal from a district court's order granting a defendant's motion to suppress, [294 Neb. 748] so such an appeal is an expected and reasonable consequence of the defendant's motion to suppress and final disposition of the motion to suppress under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(a) (Cum. Supp. 2014) does not occur until the State's appeal is decided.

         Appeal from the District Court for Garden County: Derek C. Weimer, Judge.

          Kelly S. Breen, of Nebraska Commission on Public Advocacy, for appellant.

          Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Stacy M. Foust for appellee.

          Heavican, C.J., Wright, Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, and Kelch, JJ.

          STACY, J.

         Edward Hood appeals from a district court order denying his motion for absolute discharge. The issue presented is whether to exclude from the speedy trial calculation time attributable to the State's unsuccessful appeal from an order sustaining Hood's motion to suppress evidence. We conclude the speedy trial clock was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.