- 22 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

299 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. BRIDGEFORD

Cite as 299 Neb. 22

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Gerard Bridgeford, appellant.

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Judith Bridgeford, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed February 16, 2018. Nos. S-16-1032, S-16-1035.

supplemental opinion

Appeals from the District Court for Saunders County: Mary

C. Gilbride, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for 

rehearing overruled.

Jennifer D. Joakim for appellant Gerard Bridgeford.

Mark A. Steele, of Steele Law Office, for appellant Judith 

Bridgeford.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Siobhan E. 

Duffy for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Wright, Miller‐Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, 

Kelch, and Funke, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Cases Nos. S-16-1032 and S-16-1035 are before this court 

on the appellee’s consolidated motion for rehearing concerning 

our opinion in State v. Bridgeford.

1

 We overrule the motion, 

but we modify the original opinion as follows:

1 State v. Bridgeford, 298 Neb. 156, 903 N.W.2d 22 (2017).

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

03/09/2018 12:13 AM CST
- 23 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

299 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. BRIDGEFORD

Cite as 299 Neb. 22

(1) We withdraw syllabus point 72 and the second to the 

last sentence in the seventh paragraph under the subheading 

“Statutory Right”3 and substitute the following wording in 

both instances:

The excludable period attributable to an indefinite continuance of trial granted by the trial court upon the 

defendant’s motion runs from the day of the motion until 

either the defendant’s notice of a request for trial or the 

date set for trial by the court’s own motion.4

(2) We withdraw the entirety of the 10th paragraph 

under the subheading “Statutory Right”5 and substitute the 

following:

Judith extended her December 3, 2014, speedy trial 

date when, on August 18, she filed a motion for an 

indefinite continuance of her trial. The period of delay 

attributable to Judith’s motion did not end until the new 

trial date of June 25, 2015, since, despite intervening 

motions, that was the first trial date set after the August 

18, 2014, motion. The new trial date of June 25, 2015, 

exceeded the 6-month period calculated at the time of 

her motion to continue, which expired on December 

3, 2014.

(3) We withdraw the entirety of the 11th paragraph 

under the subheading “Statutory Right”6 and substitute the 

following:

Judith’s indefinite continuance resulted in a trial date 

that exceeded the 6-month period as calculated with the 

2 Id. at 157, 903 N.W.2d at 24.

3 Id. at 163, 903 N.W.2d at 27.

4 See, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(a) and (b) (Reissue 2016); State v. 

Wells, 277 Neb. 476, 763 N.W.2d 380 (2009); State v. Williams, 277 Neb. 

133, 761 N.W.2d 514 (2009) (Wright, J., concurring; Heavican, C.J., and 

Connolly, J., join); State v. Schmader, 13 Neb. App. 321, 691 N.W.2d 559 

(2005).

5 State v. Bridgeford, supra note 1, 298 Neb. at 164, 903 N.W.2d at 28.

6 Id.
- 24 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

299 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. BRIDGEFORD

Cite as 299 Neb. 22

excludable periods up to the date of the motion. Judith 

permanently waived her statutory speedy trial right by 

virtue of the August 18, 2014, motion to continue.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

 Former opinion modified. 

 Motion for rehearing overruled.

Wright, J., not participating in the supplemental opinion.