Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court held that the lower courts failed to make the specific factual findings and speedy-trial calculations required when ruling on a motion for absolute discharge. It reversed the district court’s order and remanded with directions for the county court to enter an order detailing each excludable period and the remaining time under Nebraska’s statutory speedy-trial scheme.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the county court's order denying Lintz's motion for absolute discharge was a final, appealable order.
- Whether the county court was required to make specific findings identifying and calculating each statutorily excludable period when ruling on a motion for absolute discharge under Nebraska's speedy-trial statutes.
- Whether the absence of those findings prevented meaningful appellate review and required remand.
Holdings
- A ruling on a motion for absolute discharge based on a nonfrivolous claim that statutory speedy-trial rights were violated affects a substantial right, is made during a special proceeding, and is final and appealable.
- When ruling on a motion for absolute discharge under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1208, a trial court must make specific findings for each delay period excludable under § 29-1207(4)(a) through (e), in addition to findings under § 29-1207(4)(f). The findings must identify the dates and nature of the events initiating and ending each period, the number of days in each period, and the number of days remaining in which the defendant may be brought to trial.
- Because the county court failed to include the required computation of excludable days, the district court's affirmance could not stand; the matter had to be remanded for the required findings and calculation.
Key quotations
“Such findings shall include the date and nature of the proceedings, circumstances, or rulings which initiated and concluded each excludable period; the number of days composing each excludable period; and the number of days remaining in which the defendant may be brought to trial after taking into consideration all excludable periods.” (107)
Factual background
Lintz was arrested on February 5, 2016, and charged three days later with third degree domestic assault. The county court scheduled jury selection for July 26 and trial for August 9, but Lintz failed to appear for jury selection, resulting in a bench warrant and an added failure-to-appear charge. After Lintz surrendered and waived a jury trial, he moved for absolute discharge, arguing that the six-month statutory speedy-trial period had expired; the county court denied the motion without making the required detailed findings and calculations concerning excludable periods.
Procedural history
Lintz was charged in county court with third degree domestic assault and later failure to appear. After he moved for absolute discharge, the county court denied the motion, reasoning that his failure to appear for jury selection caused an excludable delay. The district court affirmed. The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed because the county court did not make the specific statutory speedy-trial calculations required for meaningful appellate review and remanded with directions for the district court to remand to the county court.
Remand instructions
The district court must remand the matter to the county court, which must enter an order containing specific findings for each statutorily excludable period, including the initiating and concluding dates and nature of each period, the number of days in each period, and the number of days remaining in which Lintz may be brought to trial. The parties may then file new appeals from the corrected order.