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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3805 (2026)

Untried charges; trial; when

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Within one hundred eighty days after the prosecutor receives a certificate from the director pursuant to section 29-3803 or 29-3804 or within such additional time as the court for good cause shown in open court may grant, the untried indictment, information, or complaint shall be brought to trial with the prisoner or his or her counsel being present. The parties may stipulate for a continuance or a continuance may be granted on a notice to the attorney of record and an opportunity for him or her to be heard. If the indictment, information, or complaint is not brought to trial within the time period stated in this section, including applicable continuances, no court of this state shall any longer have jurisdiction thereof nor shall the untried indictment, information, or complaint be of any further force or effect and it shall be dismissed with prejudice.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1986–2023 · leading case: State v. Kolbjornsen, 888 N.W.2d 153 (Neb. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Kolbjornsen, 888 N.W.2d 153 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 12× “§ 29-3805 (Reissue 2016), rather than the procedure under Neb.”
State v. Yzeta, 983 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 14× “§§ 29-3801 to 29-3809 (Reissue 2016), including the speedy trial provision of § 29-3805, cease to apply to a criminal defendant when he or she is discharged from the custody of the Department of Correctional Services. 13. Trial: Appeal and Error.”
State v. Soule, 379 N.W.2d 762 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 15× “Soule’s sole assignment of error is that “[t]he Court below erred by overruling Appellant’s motion for discharge made pursuant to [ Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3805 (Cum. Supp. 1984)].”
Bradley v. Hopkins, 522 N.W.2d 394 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 5× “§ 29-3805. Failing that, all Nebraska state courts are divested of jurisdiction to deal with the charges.”
State v. Ebert, 455 N.W.2d 165 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 7× “Section 29-3805 provides that the untried charges must be brought to trial within 180 days after the prosecutor receives a certificate from the Director pursuant to §§ 29-3803 or 29-3804.”
State v. Steele, 624 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 2× “When dealing with in-state prisoners, the trial deadline under § 29-3805 can be triggered only by the prosecutor’s receipt of *547 the required certificate from the Director of Correctional Services.”
State v. Caldwell, 639 N.W.2d 663 (Neb. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 7× “Caldwell asserted that the State failed to bring him to trial within the 180-day time limit set forth in § 29-3805. In support of his motion, Caldwell argued that the State did not have good cause to continue the case.”
State v. Rouse, 688 N.W.2d 889 (Neb. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 7× “On December 8, 2003, Rouse filed the above-mentioned motion to discharge, seeking dismissal of the charges against him on the ground that the State had failed to bring the matter to trial within 180 days as required by § 29-3805. On December 16 — the date that trial was…”
State v. Coomes, 962 N.W.2d 510 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 2× “37 With these principles in mind, we consider the district court’s factual findings of good cause. We focus first on the time period from January 17 to February 11, 2020.”
State v. Tucker, 609 N.W.2d 306 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 2× “It is a prosecutor’s receipt of the statutorily required certificate from the Director of Correctional Services pursuant to § 29-3803 or § 29-3804 which triggers the 180-day period for disposition of untried charges prescribed by § 29-3805. State v. Ebert, supra; State v.”
State v. Beitel, 895 N.W.2d 710 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “The [c]ourt has considered the evidence received today, exhibits 4-13, and also exhibits 1-3 received at the hearing on consolidation.”
State v. Rieger, 708 N.W.2d 630 (Neb. 2006). “In Soule , we determined that in the absence of a continuance, the 180-day time limit under § 29-3805 would have expired on November 20, 1984, since the prisoner’s request for disposition was received on May 24, 1984.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.