It shall be the duty of the county attorney of the proper county to inquire into and make full examination of all the facts and circumstances connected with any case on preliminary examination, as provided by law, touching the commission of any offense wherein the offender shall be committed to jail, or become recognized or held to bail. If the prosecuting attorney shall determine in any such case that an information ought not to be filed, he shall make, subscribe, and file with the clerk of the court a statement in writing, containing his reasons, in fact and in law, for not filing an information in such case; and such statement shall be filed at and during the term of court at which the offender shall be held for his appearance; Provided, in such case such court may examine the statement, together with the evidence filed in the case, and if, upon such examination, the court shall not be satisfied with the statement, the county attorney shall be directed by the court to file the proper information and bring the case to trial.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1970–2015 · leading case:
Parsons v. McCann, 138 F. Supp. 3d 1086 (D. Neb. 2015).
Parsons v. McCann, 138 F. Supp. 3d 1086 (D. Neb. 2015).
· cites it 4× “”); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1606 (Westlaw 2015) ("It shall be the duty of the county attorney .”
State v. Sanchell, 216 N.W.2d 504 (Neb. 1974).
· cites it 4× “Section 29-1606, R.R.S.1943, provides that after preliminary examination the county attorney is required to file an information and if he determines he should not do so he must seek court permission and justify his action.”
State v. Al-Sayagh, 689 N.W.2d 587 (Neb. 2004).
· cites it 2× “However, in Nebraska, we have interpreted Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1606 (Reissue 1995) to require approval of the court to dismiss an information.”
State v. Javins, 255 N.W.2d 872 (Neb. 1977).
· cites it 2× “The county attorney sought and obtained permission of the court for the dismissal of the felony charge as required by section 29-1606, R. R. S. 1943. State v. Sanchell, 191 Neb.”
Kartman v. Parratt, 397 F. Supp. 531 (D. Neb. 1975).
· cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1606 (Reissue 1964) provides in part that if a county attorney, after investigating a case, determines that an information ought not to be filed, he shall file with the clerk of the court his reasons for not filing the information; “Provided, in such case such…”
Martin v. Parratt, 412 F. Supp. 544 (D. Neb. 1976).
· cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1606 (1964) provides in relevant part as follows: It shall be the duty of the county attorney of the proper county to inquire into and make full examination of all the facts and circumstances connected with any case on preliminary examination .”
In re Interest of Moore, 180 N.W.2d 919 (Neb. 1970).
· cites it 2× “It is in the nature of obiter dictum and may possibly be construed as in conflict with section 29-1606, R. R. S. 1943, construction of which is neither necessary nor pertinent in the present instance.”
Moore v. State, 180 N.W.2d 917 (Neb. 1970).
· cites it 2× “It is in the nature of obiter dictum and may possibly be construed as in conflict with section 29-1606, R.R.S. 1943, construction of which is neither necessary nor pertinent in the present instance.”
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.