 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Schneider1/15/2002
1. Final Orders: Speedy Trial: Pretrial Procedure. A ruling on a motion to discharge under the speedy trial statute is a final, appealable order.
2. Judgments: Speedy Trial: Appeal and Error. Ordinarily, 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.
3. Speedy Trial: Indictments and Informations: Complaints. Although the speedy trial act expressly refers to indictments and informations, the act also applies to prosecutions on complaint.
4. Speedy Trial: Complaints. In cases commenced and tried in county court, the 6-month period within which an accused must be brought to trial begins to run on the date the complaint is filed.
Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County, J. Michael Coffey, Judge, on appeal thereto from the County Court for Douglas County, Jeffrey L. Marcuzzo, Judge. Judgment of District Court affirmed.
INTRODUCTION
Fred W. Schneider, Jr., appeals the Douglas County District Court's order affirming the Douglas County Court's denial of his motion for absolute discharge on speedy trial grounds. For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On May 4, 2000, a complaint was filed in Douglas County Court charging Schneider with second-offense driving under the influence in violation of Omaha city ordinance § 36-115. On May 10, Schneider filed a demurrer which he amended on May 30. That same date, he also filed a motion to quash which was also amended on May 30. On May 12, Schneider filed a motion for production of documents. On June 8, the county court granted the motion for production of documents and denied the motion to quash. The amended demurrer was sustained by the county court on July 27.
On September 7, 2000, a complaint was filed in Douglas County Court based on the same set of facts as the earlier complaint except charging Schneider with second-offense driving under the influence in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,196(2)(b) (Supp. 1999).
On November 6, 2000, Schneider filed a motion for absolute discharge based upon the alleged violation of his right to a speedy trial. A hearing on this motion was held, and the motion was denied by the county court. Schneider appealed to the Douglas County District Court which affirmed the decision of the county court. Schneider has timely appealed to this court.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
On appeal, Schneider contends that the district court erred in affirming the county court's denial of his motion for absolute discharge on speedy trial grounds.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
A ruling on a motion to discharge under the speedy trial statute is a final, appealable order. State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247, 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997); State v. Cox, 10 Neb. App. 501, 632 N.W.2d 807 (2001).
Ordinarily, 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. State v. Baird, 259 Neb. 245, 609 N.W.2d 349 (2000); State v. Cox, supra.
ANALYSIS
Schneider's sole assigned error is that the district court erred in affirming the county court's denial of his motion for absolute discharge on speedy trial grounds. Schneider argues that the complaints filed pursuant to the driving under the influence ordinance and the state statute are, in essence, one and the same offense and that thus, the time from the filing of the complaint filed pursuant to the ordinance should be counted for speedy tr
Page 1 2 Nebraska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|