Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1205 (2026)

Right of accused to a speedy trial; preferences

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

To effectuate the right of the accused to a speedy trial and the interest of the public in prompt disposition of criminal cases, insofar as is practicable:

(1) The trial of criminal cases shall be given preference over civil cases; and

(2) The trial of defendants in custody and defendants whose pretrial liberty is reasonably believed to present unusual risks shall be given preference over other criminal cases. It shall be the duty of the county attorney to bring to the attention of the trial court any cases falling within this subdivision, and he shall generally advise the court of facts relevant in determining the order of cases to be tried.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: State v. Alvarez, 202 N.W.2d 604 (Neb. 1972).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Alvarez, 202 N.W.2d 604 (Neb. 1972). · cites it 15× “He makes the following assignments of error: (1) The court erred in denying his motion for absolute discharge because of the failure of the State to bring him to trial within the time provided by sections 29-1205 to 29-1209, R.S.Supp., 1971, which became effective April 30,…”
State v. Sims, 725 N.W.2d 175 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 5× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1205 (Reissue 1995) states that “[t]o effectuate the right of the accused to a speedy trial.”
State v. Yzeta, 983 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 4× “202 But the court found that there was a “continuance” in the county court from November 3 to December 22, 2021. Citing one of our decisions, the court described the continuance as having been obtained “either by [Yzeta], or by the [p]rosecutor with the implicit consent of…”
State v. Space, 980 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 5× “456 monitoring the speedy trial deadline, the prosecution should promptly bring to the trial court’s attention any potential con- cerns regarding the defendant’s right to a speedy trial.”
State v. Turner, 564 N.W.2d 231 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 3× “ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR Turner makes the following assignments of error: (1) The trial court erred in failing to bring Turner to trial within a reasonable time, in violation of the state and federal Constitutions; (2) the trial court erred in failing to bring Turner to trial within…”
State v. Baker, 652 N.W.2d 612 (Neb. 2002). · cites it 2× “ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR Baker assigns as error that the district court erred by failing to grant his motion to discharge, because the State did not bring him to trial within 6 months as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-1205 through 29-1209 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Steele, 624 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 2× “Applicable Statutes Steele contends his statutory trial deadline is governed by Nebraska’s speedy trial statutes, Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-1205 to 29-1209 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Abernathy, 969 N.W.2d 871 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 2× “I, § 11; Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-1205 to 29-1209 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Hernandez, 309 Neb. 299 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 4× “1 At the hear- ing, the State argued that, despite no evidence of any effort to serve a bench warrant, its mere issuance “stopped the clock for purposes of speedy trial.”
State v. Boslau, 601 N.W.2d 769 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 2× “On August 18, the State filed its amended information, adding a witness.”
State v. Schroder, 359 N.W.2d 799 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 3× “The speedy trial statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1205 (Reissue 1979), states that its purpose is “[t]o effectuate the right of the accused to a speedy trial and the interest of the public in prompt disposition of criminal cases .”
Interest of C.P. v. M.A., 455 N.W.2d 138 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 3× “After deducting time excludable from the 6-month period, there were still 240 days between the filing of the termination petition and commencement of the adjudication hearing, which is well beyond the 6-month period. M.A. concludes that because of the delay in hearing the…”
Show all 36 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1205(b) — 1 case
State v. Dolinar, 319 Neb. 565 (Neb. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.