Judgments: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. A
jurisdictional question that does not involve a factual
dispute is determined by an appellate court as a matter of
law, which requires the appellate court to reach a conclusion
independent of the lower court's decision.
Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. Before
reaching the legal issues presented for review, it is the
duty of an appellate court to determine whether it has
jurisdiction over the matter before it, irrespective of
whether the issue is raised by the parties.
Final Orders: Appeal and Error. Numerous
factors have been set forth defining when an order affects a
substantial right. Broadly, these factors relate to the
importance of the right and the importance of the effect on
the right by the order at issue. It is not enough that the
right itself be substantial; the effect of the order on that
right must also be substantial.
Words and Phrases. A substantial right is an
essential legal right, not merely a technical right.
Final Orders: Appeal and Error. An order
affects a substantial right if it affects the subject matter
of the litigation, such as diminishing a claim or defense
that was available to the appellant prior to the order from
which he or she is appealing.
from the District Court for Lancaster County: Jodi L. Nelson,
Judge. Appeal dismissed.
D. Nigro, Lancaster County Public Defender, and Matthew F.
Meyerle for appellant.
Neb. 111] Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Nathan
A. Liss for appellee.
Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik,
and Freudenberg, JJ.
R. Thalmann was serving a sentence of probation following a
conviction for possession of a controlled substance. After
several positive drug and alcohol screens, his probation
officer sought the imposition of a custodial sanction. The
district court imposed a 15-day custodial sanction. Thalmann
appeals. We dismiss Thalmann's appeal.
was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, a
Class IV felony, and sentenced to a term of 3 years'
probation. Just 2 months into that term of probation,
Thalmann's probation officer sought the imposition of a
custodial sanction. A hearing was held on the motion for a
hearing, the State offered the testimony of Thalmann's
probation officer and various exhibits in support of the
request for a custodial sanction. The district court granted
the motion ...