Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319

Exception proceedings by prosecuting attorney; decision of district court; effect

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The judgment of the court in any action taken under the provisions of sections 29-2317 and 29-2318 shall not be reversed nor in any manner affected when the defendant in the trial court has been placed legally in jeopardy, but in such cases the decision of the district court shall determine the law to govern in any similar case which may be pending at the time the decision is rendered, or which may thereafter arise in the district.

(2) When the decision of the district court establishes that the final order of the trial court was erroneous and that the defendant had not been placed legally in jeopardy prior to the entry of such erroneous order, the trial court may upon application of the prosecuting attorney issue its warrant for the rearrest of the defendant and the cause against the defendant shall thereupon proceed in accordance with the law as determined by the decision of the district court.

(3) The prosecuting attorney may take exception to any ruling or decision of the district court in the manner provided by sections 29-2315.01 to 29-2316.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1978–2018 · leading case: State v. Hense
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hense (2008) neb · cites it 8× “2d 222 (2000), we were required to apply the language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319 (1) (Reissue 1995), which is virtually identical to § 29-2316 at issue herein except that § 29-2319(1) relates to error proceedings taken from a county court to a district court pursuant to Neb.”
State v. Thalken (2018) neb · cites it 3× “88 And in a case where an exception proceeding had been taken from the county court to the district court under § 29-2317 (Reissue 1975), we found that the district court's conclusion that the county **881 court had erred was correct, but that under the language of Neb. Rev.…”
State v. Neiss (2000) neb · cites it 15× “On appeal to the Court of Appeals, Neiss assigned as error the district court’s (1) reversing the county court’s decision to sen *694 tence him as a second-offense DUI, as opposed to a third offense, and (2) reversing the decision and remanding the case to the county court for…”
State v. McDermott (1978) neb · cites it 5× “Section 29-2319 (1), R. R. S. 1943, provides: “The judgment of the court in any action taken under the provisions of sections 29-2317 and 29- *340 2318 shall not be reversed nor in any manner affected when the defendant in the trial court has been placed legally in jeopardy, but…”
State v. Jones (2002) neb · cites it 9× “) By its terms, § 29-2319 refers to district court orders which were entered in an appeal to the district court brought by a prosecutor rather than by a criminal defendant, such as in the instant case.”
State v. Loyd (2003) neb · cites it 2× “The State takes exception under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319 (3) (Reissue 1995) to the district court’s order affirming the county court’s granting of a motion to quash.”
State v. Dorcey (1999) neb “Section 29-2317(2) further provides that “[t]he notice [filed in county court] shall be presented to the court within twenty days after the final order is entered in the cause.”
State v. Werner (1999) nebctapp · cites it 2× “shall not be reversed nor in any manner affected when the defendant in the trial court has been placed legally in jeopardy, but in such cases the decision of the district court shall determine the law to govern in any similar case which may be pending at the time the decision is…”
State v. Sports Couriers, Inc. (1981) neb · cites it 2× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319 (Reissue 1979) provides: “(1) The judgment of the court in any action taken under the provisions of sections 29-2317 and 29-2318 shall not be reversed nor in any manner affected when the defendant in the trial court has been placed legally in jeopardy…”
State v. Thalken (2018) neb · cites it 3× “As we reasoned in Vasquez, when the Legislature chose language which limited relief where the defendant has previously been placed legally in jeopardy, it meant something different from constitutional double jeop- ardy.”
State v. Workman (1989) neb · cites it 2× “This is a proceeding under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319 (3) (Reissue 1985) to review the order of the district court affirming the judgment of the county court dismissing the charge against the defendant for driving while his operator’s license had been suspended.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319(1) — 3 cases
State v. Hense (2008) neb “2d 222 (2000), we were required to apply the language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319 (1) (Reissue 1995), which is virtually identical to § 29-2316 at issue herein except that § 29-2319(1) relates to error proceedings taken from a county court to a district court pursuant to Neb.”
State v. McDermott (1978) neb “Section 29-2319 (1), R. R. S. 1943, provides: “The judgment of the court in any action taken under the provisions of sections 29-2317 and 29- *340 2318 shall not be reversed nor in any manner affected when the defendant in the trial court has been placed legally in jeopardy, but…”
State v. Dorcey (1999) neb “Section 29-2317(2) further provides that “[t]he notice [filed in county court] shall be presented to the court within twenty days after the final order is entered in the cause.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319(2) — 1 case
State v. Jones (2002) neb “) By its terms, § 29-2319 refers to district court orders which were entered in an appeal to the district court brought by a prosecutor rather than by a criminal defendant, such as in the instant case.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2319(3) — 1 case
State v. Jones (2002) neb “) By its terms, § 29-2319 refers to district court orders which were entered in an appeal to the district court brought by a prosecutor rather than by a criminal defendant, such as in the instant case.”
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.