State v. Chambers
| Decision Date | 24 December 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. S-92-505,S-92-505 |
| Citation | 493 N.W.2d 328,242 Neb. 124 |
| Parties | STATE of Nebraska, Appellant, v. Doretha R. CHAMBERS, Appellee. |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Courts: Jurisdiction. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 24-1104 (Cum.Supp.1992) does not confer upon the Nebraska Supreme Court the jurisdiction to order the publication of an opinion of a single judge of the Nebraska Court of Appeals, nor does authority exist for publication in the absence of such an order.
2. Statutes. In the absence of anything indicating to the contrary, statutory language is to be given its plain and ordinary meaning; when the words of a statute are plain, direct, and unambiguous, no interpretation is necessary or will be indulged to ascertain their meaning.
3. Courts: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 24-1107 (Cum.Supp.1992) does not confer upon the Nebraska Supreme Court the jurisdiction to review an opinion of a single judge of the Nebraska Court of Appeals.
This matter is before us on the recommendation for publication of an opinion of a single judge of the Nebraska Court of Appeals reversing the suppression order of the district court.
Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-824 (Cum.Supp.1992) provides, in pertinent part, that the State (Emphasis supplied.) The relevant portion of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 24-1104(1) (Cum.Supp.1992) reads: "Decisions of the Court of Appeals ... shall not be published unless ... ordered by the Supreme Court." (Emphasis supplied.)
The controlling rule is that in the absence of anything indicating to the contrary, statutory language is to be given its plain and ordinary meaning; when the words of a statute are plain, direct, and unambiguous, no interpretation is necessary or will be indulged to ascertain their meaning. State v. Brohimer, 238 Neb. 45, 468 N.W.2d 623 (1991). See, also, In re Interest of Powers, 242 Neb. 19, 493 N.W.2d 166 (1992).
An opinion of a single judge of the Court of Appeals is obviously not an opinion of the Court of Appeals, and thus, just as obviously, § 24-1104 does not provide this court with jurisdiction to order its publication. Neither does authority exist for publication in the absence of such an order.
This is as it should be, for while a single-judge opinion provides a review of a suppression order in a particular case, the opinion does...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Omaha Public Power Dist. v. Nebraska Dept. of Revenue
...ended with the determination that electricity is not tangible personal property as such is defined in § 77-105. See State v. Chambers, 242 Neb. 124, 493 N.W.2d 328 (1992) (when words of statute not ambiguous, interpretation not only not necessary but will not be However, because the majorit......
-
Hamilton v. Hamilton, S-91-461
...of M.J.B., 242 Neb. 671, 496 N.W.2d 495 (1993); Curry v. State ex rel. Stenberg, 242 Neb. 695, 496 N.W.2d 512 (1993); State v. Chambers, 242 Neb. 124, 493 N.W.2d 328 (1992). Nonetheless, a party may not lull an adversary into a false sense of security, thereby cause the adversary to subject......
-
State v. March
...authorized. The motion for rehearing was stricken. State v. March, 9 Neb.App. 907, 622 N.W.2d 694 (2001). See, also, State v. Chambers, 242 Neb. 124, 493 N.W.2d 328 (1992). During the subsequent bench trial, March attempted to raise the issues first raised in his motion to suppress. In this......
-
Fecht v. Bunnell Co., Inc., S-90-506
...will be indulged to ascertain their meaning. Curry, supra; Hamilton v. Hamilton, 242 Neb. 687, 496 N.W.2d 507 (1993); State v. Chambers, 242 Neb. 124, 493 N.W.2d 328 (1992). Further, the components of a series or collection of statutes pertaining to a certain subject matter may be conjuncti......
-
Appellate Practice in Nebraska: a Thorough, Though Not Exhaustive, Primer in How to Do it and How to Be More Effective
...NEB. REV. STAT. § 29-824 (2). 129. NEB. REV. STAT. § 29-824 (3). 130. NEB. REV. STAT. § 29-824 (2) and (3). 131. E.g., State v. Chambers, 242 Neb. 124, 125-26, 493 N.W.2d 328, 329 (1992); State v. White, 220 Neb. 527, 529, 371 N.W.2d 262, 264 (1985). In addition, a motion for rehearing is i......