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
Statutes: Appeal and Error. Statutory
interpretation presents a question of law, which an appellate
court reviews independently of the lower court's
Speedy Trial. The statutory right to a
speedy trial is set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. §§
29-1207 and 29-1208 (Reissue 2016).
If a defendant is not brought to trial before the running of
the time for trial as provided for in Neb. Rev. Stat. §
29-1207 (Reissue 2016), as extended by excluded periods, he
or she shall be entitled to his or her absolute discharge
from the offense charged and for any other offense required
by law to be joined with that offense.
calculate the deadline for trial under the speedy trial
statutes, a court must exclude the day the State filed the
information, count forward 6 months, back up 1 day, and then
add any time excluded under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)
For speedy trial purposes, the calculation of excludable time
for a continuance begins the day after the continuance is
granted and includes the day on which the continuance ends.
Speedy Trial: Waiver: Appeal and Error. A
defendant's motion to discharge based on statutory speedy
trial grounds will be deemed to be a waiver of that right
under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(b) (Reissue 2016)
where (1) the filing of such motion results in the
continuance of a timely trial to a date outside the statutory
6-month period, as calculated on the date the motion to
discharge was filed; (2) discharge is denied; and (3) that
denial is affirmed on appeal.
Neb. 845] 8. Constitutional Law: Speedy
Trial. The constitutional right to a speedy trial is
guaranteed by U.S. Const, amend. VI and Neb. Const, art. I,
from the District Court for Sarpy County: Nathan B. Cox,
Carolyn Wilson, Assistant Sarpy County Public Defender, and
Mitchell Sells, Senior Certified Law Student, for appellant.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Stacy M. Foust for
Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik,
and Freudenberg, JJ.
J. Lovvorn filed a motion for discharge on statutory and
constitutional speedy trial grounds. The district court
overruled the motion, and Lovvorn appeals that ruling. For
reasons we will explain, we affirm.
January 19, 2018, the State filed an information against
Lovvorn in the district court for Sarpy County. The State
charged Lovvorn with theft by receiving stolen property, $5,
000 or more; possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited
person; possession of a firearm by a prohibited person;
driving under revocation/court order; carrying a concealed
weapon; reckless driving; obstructing a peace officer;
possession of marijuana, 1 ounce or less, or synthetically
produced cannabinoids; and ...