2023 Nebraska Revised Statutes › Chapter 60 - Motor Vehicles › 60-6,197.03 - Driving under influence of alcoholic liquor or drugs; implied consent to submit to chemical test; penalties.

60-6,197.03.
Driving under influence of alcoholic liquor or drugs; implied consent to submit to chemical test; penalties.
Any person convicted of a violation of section 60-6,196 or 60-6,197 shall be punished as follows:
(1) Except as provided in subdivision (2) of this section, if such person has not had a prior conviction, such person shall be guilty of a Class W misdemeanor, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of six months from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person apply for an ignition interlock permit pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 for the revocation period and have an ignition interlock device installed on any motor vehicle he or she operates during the revocation period. Such revocation shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of sixty days from the date ordered by the court. The court shall order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit pursuant to section 60-6,211.05. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as one of its conditions, the payment of a five-hundred-dollar fine;
(2) If such person has not had a prior conviction and, as part of the current violation, had a concentration of fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of his or her blood or fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his or her breath, such person shall be guilty of a Class W misdemeanor, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, revoke the operator's license of such person for a period of one year from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person apply for an ignition interlock permit pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01 for the revocation period and have an ignition interlock device installed on any motor vehicle he or she operates during the revocation period. Such revocation shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of one year from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person apply for an ignition interlock permit pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01 for the revocation period and have an ignition interlock device installed on any motor vehicle he or she operates during the revocation period. Such revocation shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a five-hundred-dollar fine and either confinement in the city or county jail for two days or the imposition of not less than one hundred twenty hours of community service;
(3) Except as provided in subdivision (5) of this section, if such person has had one prior conviction, such person shall be guilty of a Class W misdemeanor, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of eighteen months from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days and that the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and have an ignition interlock device installed on any motor vehicle he or she owns or operates for at least one year. The court shall also issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. If the person has an ignition interlock device installed as required under this subdivision, the person shall not be eligible for reinstatement of his or her operator's license until he or she has had the ignition interlock device installed for the period ordered by the court. The revocation shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of eighteen months from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days and that the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device for not less than a one-year period pursuant to section 60-6,211.05. The court shall also issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. If the person has an ignition interlock device installed as required under this subdivision, the person shall not be eligible for reinstatement of his or her operator's license until he or she has had the ignition interlock device installed for the period ordered by the court. The order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a five-hundred-dollar fine and either confinement in the city or county jail for ten days or the imposition of not less than two hundred forty hours of community service;
(4) Except as provided in subdivision (6) of this section, if such person has had two prior convictions, such person shall be guilty of a Class W misdemeanor, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such orders shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of at least two years but not more than fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a one-thousand-dollar fine and confinement in the city or county jail for thirty days;
(5) If such person has had one prior conviction and, as part of the current violation, had a concentration of fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of his or her blood or fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his or her breath or refused to submit to a test as required under section 60-6,197, such person shall be guilty of a Class I misdemeanor, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order payment of a one-thousand-dollar fine and revoke the operator's license of such person for a period of at least eighteen months but not more than fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such revocation and order shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked. The court shall also sentence such person to serve at least ninety days' imprisonment in the city or county jail or an adult correctional facility.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of at least eighteen months but not more than fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days and that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device for not less than a one-year period issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05. The court shall also issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. If the person has an ignition interlock device installed as required under this subdivision, the person shall not be eligible for reinstatement of his or her operator's license until he or she has had the ignition interlock device installed for the period ordered by the court. The order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a one-thousand-dollar fine and confinement in the city or county jail for thirty days;
(6) If such person has had two prior convictions and, as part of the current violation, had a concentration of fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of his or her blood or fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his or her breath or refused to submit to a test as required under section 60-6,197, such person shall be guilty of a Class IIIA felony, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, revoke the operator's license of such person for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such revocation and order shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked. The court shall also sentence such person to serve at least one hundred eighty days' imprisonment in the city or county jail or an adult correctional facility.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of at least five years but not more than fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a one-thousand-dollar fine, confinement in the city or county jail for sixty days, and, upon release from such confinement, the use of a continuous alcohol monitoring device and abstention from alcohol use at all times for no less than sixty days;
(7) Except as provided in subdivision (8) of this section, if such person has had three prior convictions, such person shall be guilty of a Class IIIA felony, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such orders shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked. The court shall also sentence such person to serve at least one hundred eighty days' imprisonment in the city or county jail or an adult correctional facility.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a two-thousand-dollar fine, confinement in the city or county jail for ninety days, and, upon release from such confinement, the use of a continuous alcohol monitoring device and abstention from alcohol use at all times for no less than ninety days;
(8) If such person has had three prior convictions and, as part of the current violation, had a concentration of fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of his or her blood or fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his or her breath or refused to submit to a test as required under section 60-6,197, such person shall be guilty of a Class IIA felony, with a minimum sentence of one year of imprisonment, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, revoke the operator's license of such person for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such revocation and order shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a two-thousand-dollar fine, confinement in the city or county jail for one hundred twenty days, and, upon release from such confinement, the use of a continuous alcohol monitoring device and abstention from alcohol use at all times for no less than one hundred twenty days;
(9) Except as provided in subdivision (10) of this section, if such person has had four or more prior convictions, such person shall be guilty of a Class IIA felony with a minimum sentence of two years' imprisonment, and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such orders shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a two-thousand-dollar fine, confinement in the city or county jail for one hundred eighty days, and, upon release from such confinement, the use of a continuous alcohol monitoring device and abstention from alcohol use at all times for no less than one hundred eighty days; and
(10) If such person has had four or more prior convictions and, as part of the current violation, had a concentration of fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of his or her blood or fifteen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his or her breath or refused to submit to a test as required under section 60-6,197, such person shall be guilty of a Class II felony with a minimum sentence of two years' imprisonment and the court shall, as part of the judgment of conviction, revoke the operator's license of such person for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court and shall issue an order pursuant to section 60-6,197.01. Such revocation and order shall be administered upon sentencing, upon final judgment of any appeal or review, or upon the date that any probation is revoked.
If the court places such person on probation or suspends the sentence for any reason, the court shall, as one of the conditions of probation or sentence suspension, order that the operator's license of such person be revoked for a period of fifteen years from the date ordered by the court. The revocation order shall require that the person not drive for a period of forty-five days, after which the court may order that during the period of revocation the person apply for an ignition interlock permit and installation of an ignition interlock device issued pursuant to section 60-6,211.05 and shall issue an order pursuant to subdivision (1)(b) of section 60-6,197.01. Such order of probation or sentence suspension shall also include, as conditions, the payment of a two-thousand-dollar fine, confinement in the city or county jail for one hundred eighty days, and, upon release from such confinement, the use of a continuous alcohol monitoring device and abstention from alcohol use at all times for no less than one hundred eighty days.
Source
Laws 2004, LB 208, § 13;
Laws 2005, LB 594, § 3;
Laws 2006, LB 925, § 11;
Laws 2007, LB578, § 4;
Laws 2008, LB736, § 8;
Laws 2009, LB497, § 7;
Laws 2010, LB924, § 4;
Laws 2011, LB667, § 35;
Laws 2011, LB675, § 9;
Laws 2013, LB158, § 4;
Laws 2015, LB605, § 77;
Laws 2016, LB1094, § 32.
Annotations
1. Constitutionality
2. Elements
3. Impairment or under the influence
4. Enhancement
5. Miscellaneous
1. Constitutionality
Permanent license revocation upon the third conviction for drunk driving does not deprive a person of equal protection of the law, due process of law, or the right to travel, nor does it constitute cruel and unusual punishment. State v. Michalski, 221 Neb. 380, 377 N.W.2d 510 (1985).
A defendant is not entitled to a jury trial under provisions of Sixth Amendment to Constitution of the United States in trial for second offense drunk driving hereunder. State v. Young, 194 Neb. 544, 234 N.W.2d 196 (1975).
Imposition of greater penalty for subsequent offense is constitutional. Poppe v. State, 155 Neb. 527, 52 N.W.2d 422 (1952).
Legislative amendments to the length of the cleansing period provided by this section will not implicate vested due process rights of individuals with prior convictions used for enhancement. State v. Grant, 9 Neb. App. 919, 623 N.W.2d 337 (2001).
Prior driving under the influence convictions are not necessary elements of a subsequent driving under the influence charge, but, rather, are used to determine the sentence to be imposed for a later driving under the influence conviction. Thus, the district court did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause when it remanded a conviction for second-offense driving under the influence to the county court with directions to enter a judgment finding the defendant guilty of third-offense driving under the influence and to sentence her accordingly. State v. Werner, 8 Neb. App. 684, 600 N.W.2d 500 (1999).
2. Elements
This section is a continuance and affirmation of the previous section 39-669.07. Convictions under section 39-669.07 can be used for the purpose of sentence enhancements under this section. State v. Sundling, 248 Neb. 732, 538 N.W.2d 749 (1995).
Revocation for 15 years is not an element of the offense of driving with a revoked license under subsection (c) of former section. State v. Reichstein, 233 Neb. 715, 447 N.W.2d 635 (1989).
3. Impairment or under the influence
Subsection (c) of this section (formerly section 39-669.07 (Reissue 1988)) limits the proof which can be used to establish the defendant's prior driving while under the influence convictions. State v. Jenson, 236 Neb. 869, 464 N.W.2d 326 (1991).
Under this provision (formerly part of section 60-6,196), a defendant may object to the validity of a prior conviction for enhancement purposes where there is no showing that at the time of the previous conviction he was represented by counsel or knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to counsel. State v. Fraser, 222 Neb. 862, 387 N.W.2d 695 (1986).
4. Enhancement
The "current violation" referred to in subdivision (8) of this section may be either a violation of the driving under the influence statute, section 60-6,196, or a violation of the refusal statute, section 60-6,197. State v. Wagner, 295 Neb. 132, 888 N.W.2d 357 (2016).
The fact that subdivision (8) of this section is not limited to driving under the influence violations does not subject persons convicted of refusal violations to multiple punishments for the same offense on the grounds that it "double dips" the act of refusal as a material element of the underlying refusal offense and as a sentencing factor. State v. Wagner, 295 Neb. 132, 888 N.W.2d 357 (2016).
Under the enhancement provisions of this section (formerly subsection (2) of section 60-6,196), a drunk driving offender is not receiving additional punishment for his or her previous convictions, but, rather, the offender is being penalized for persisting in committing the offense of driving while under the influence of liquor. State v. Neiss, 260 Neb. 691, 619 N.W.2d 222 (2000).
This section (formerly subsection (2) of section 60-6,196) authorizes a trial court to consider prior convictions of a defendant for driving under the influence of alcoholic liquor or drug within the 12 years prior to the offense for which a defendant currently stands trial and is not ex post facto as to a conviction prior to its passage, since an offender subject to enhancement of punishment under this statute is not receiving additional punishment for his or her previous convictions but is being penalized for an offense committed after its passage. This section deals with offenses committed after its passage, permits an inquiry into a defendant's previous convictions, and in fixing the penalty, does not punish the defendant for previous offenses but for persistence in violating this section. State v. Hansen, 258 Neb. 752, 605 N.W.2d 461 (2000).
The language of this section permits a defendant to challenge the validity of a prior driving under the influence conviction offered for purposes of enhancement on the ground that it was obtained in violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. State v. Louthan, 257 Neb. 174, 595 N.W.2d 917 (1999).
Pursuant to section 60-6,197.06 (formerly subsection (6) of section 60-6,196), the enhancement rules applicable to offenses committed under subdivision (3) of this section (formerly section 60-6,196(2)(c)) are not applicable to license revocation offenses committed under this section. State v. Kennedy, 251 Neb. 337, 557 N.W.2d 33 (1996).
Objections to prior convictions used for enhancement refers only to challenges based on a failure to show that in the prior proceeding defendant had counsel or voluntarily and intelligently waived his or her right to counsel. State v. Wiltshire, 241 Neb. 817, 491 N.W.2d 324 (1992).
In proceedings under subdivision (3) of this section (formerly subdivision (2)(c) of section 60-6,196) for multiple violations of this section, convictions rendered the same day, if imposed for separate offenses, may each constitute a prior conviction so as to warrant an enhanced penalty. For purposes of determining the 10-year period required by subdivision (2)(c) of this section, the time shall be computed from the date of the prior offense to that date of the offense which resulted in the current conviction. State v. Towler, 240 Neb. 103, 481 N.W.2d 151 (1992).
A previous conviction on appeal at the time the second offense is committed may not be considered a conviction for purposes of the punishment enhancement provisions of this section. State v. Estes, 238 Neb. 692, 472 N.W.2d 214 (1991).
This section (formerly part of section 60-6,196) requires only that a violator be properly convicted of two previous violations, whether the prior violation was called first or second offense. State v. Donaldson, 234 Neb. 683, 452 N.W.2d 531 (1990).
An erroneous designation in a complaint of the date on which and the county in which a prior conviction occurred will not preclude a defendant from being sentenced as one who has previously been convicted of driving while under the influence of alcohol, if the record discloses that the defendant could not have been misled or confused. State v. Wakeman, 231 Neb. 66, 434 N.W.2d 549 (1989).
For enhancement purposes under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196), the sentencing court shall make a finding on the record concerning the number of defendant's prior convictions for drunk driving. State v. Snodgrass, 230 Neb. 119, 430 N.W.2d 55 (1988).
For a prior conviction based on a plea of guilty to be used for enhancement purposes in an action under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196), the record must show that the defendant entered the guilty plea to the charge. State v. Slezak, 226 Neb. 404, 411 N.W.2d 632 (1987).
Checklist evidences defendant's waiver of counsel and satisfies State's burden in proving validity of conviction in an enhancement hearing. State v. Thompson, 224 Neb. 922, 402 N.W.2d 271 (1987).
The substantive offense is driving while under the influence of alcohol or with more than .10 percent of alcohol in one's body fluid. The number of times a person has previously been convicted of such a charge is not itself a crime but, rather, is a factor which the trial court is to consider in imposing sentence. State v. Jameson, 224 Neb. 38, 395 N.W.2d 744 (1986).
A certified copy of a judgment entered on a prior conviction for drunk driving may be used for enhancement purposes. State v. Hamblin, 223 Neb. 469, 390 N.W.2d 533 (1986).
A defendant may not relitigate a former conviction in an enhancement proceeding. State v. Fraser, 222 Neb. 862, 387 N.W.2d 695 (1986).
Under this provision (formerly part of section 60-6,196), the trial court is required to advise the defendant of his right to review the record of the prior conviction, bring mitigating facts to the attention of the court prior to sentencing, and object to the validity of the prior conviction. State v. Fraser, 222 Neb. 862, 387 N.W.2d 695 (1986).
The state has the burden to show only that defendant had or waived counsel at prior proceedings used for enhancement purposes. State v. Soe, 219 Neb. 797, 366 N.W.2d 439 (1985).
A transcript of conviction which fails to show on its face that counsel was afforded or the right waived cannot be used for enhancement purposes. State v. Baxter, 218 Neb. 414, 355 N.W.2d 514 (1984).
Record of an enhancement proceeding for second or third offense driving while intoxicated must show that the requirements of the statute were met. A defendant may waive the rights provided by this statute with regard to prior convictions. State v. Ziemba, 216 Neb. 612, 346 N.W.2d 208 (1984).
In sentencing under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196) the record of the trial court must show evidence of prior convictions and whether the defendant was represented by counsel or waived such representation in those prior proceedings. State v. Prichard, 215 Neb. 488, 339 N.W.2d 748 (1983).
Where under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196), proof has been made of a defendant's conviction on a prior misdemeanor violation of that statute, the defendant cannot raise a collateral attack upon that conviction. State v. Kelly, 212 Neb. 45, 321 N.W.2d 80 (1982).
A defendant may not collaterally attack a prior conviction when proof of that prior conviction is offered in a proceeding on the issue of enhancement of sentence. State v. Voight, 206 Neb. 829, 295 N.W.2d 112 (1980).
Third offender need not have previously been punished as second offender, but must only have been twice previously convicted of driving under the influence. State v. Orosco, 199 Neb. 532, 260 N.W.2d 303 (1977).
Proof of prior convictions was properly made. State v. Ninneman, 179 Neb. 729, 140 N.W.2d 5 (1966).
Compliance with former sentence is not essential to proof of prior conviction. Danielson v. State, 155 Neb. 890, 54 N.W.2d 56 (1952).
Standard waiver forms, once signed by a defendant, are sufficient in an enhancement proceeding to meet the State's burden of proving that defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. State v. Werner, 8 Neb. App. 684, 600 N.W.2d 500 (1999).
The time limitations for the use of prior driving under the influence convictions set forth in this section do not apply to the use of prior driving under the influence convictions to section 28-306. State v. Tlamka, 7 Neb. App. 579, 585 N.W.2d 101 (1998).
Prior convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol under former section 39-669.07 or ordinances thereunder may properly be used to enhance convictions under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196), as this section is a mere affirmance of the original act. State v. Sundling, 3 Neb. App. 722, 531 N.W.2d 7 (1995).
A defendant's allegation that the State failed to show that the defendant was present at an enhancement proceeding pursuant to a prior conviction under this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196) constituted a collateral attack, which could only be raised in a separate proceeding. State v. Jones, 1 Neb. App. 816, 510 N.W.2d 404 (1993).
5. Miscellaneous
The amendment by 2015 Neb. Laws, L.B. 605, removing the provision of section 29-2262 relating to jail time as a condition of probation for felony offenses did not implicitly repeal the provision in subsection (6) of this section that required 60 days in jail as a condition of probation. State v. Thompson, 294 Neb. 197, 881 N.W.2d 609 (2016).
Pursuant to section 29-2262(2)(b), the mandate of subsection (6) of this section that an order of probation "shall also include" 60 days' confinement does not conflict with the provision that a trial court may require the offender to be confined for a period not to exceed 180 days; the minimum jail term for a period granted probation for an offense punishable under subsection (6) of this section is 60 days, and the maximum is 180 days. State v. Dinslage, 280 Neb. 659, 789 N.W.2d 29 (2010).
Under subdivision (3) of this section (formerly subdivision (2)(c) of section 60-6,196) a 15-year revocation is part of the overall punishment of a defendant, in conjunction with the fines and jail terms imposed for the offense under Class W misdemeanors. State v. Bainbridge, 249 Neb. 260, 543 N.W.2d 154 (1996).
Under subdivision (3) of this section (formerly subdivision (2)(c) of section 60-6,196) an order of probation for a person convicted of third-offense driving while under the influence of alcoholic liquor may include a provision not to operate a motor vehicle for any reason whatsoever during the entire term of probation. State v. Seaman, 237 Neb. 916, 468 N.W.2d 121 (1991).
The relevant portion of this section (formerly part of section 60-6,196) directs in clear, plain, simple, and unambiguous words that when one convicted of first-offense driving while intoxicated is placed on probation, he or she shall be ordered not to drive for any purpose for a period of 60 days from the date of the order of probation. State v. Matthews, 237 Neb. 300, 465 N.W.2d 763 (1991).
Revocation of one's operator's license for a period of 365 days will not always fulfill the requirement that revocation be for a period of 1 year. State v. Contreras, 236 Neb. 455, 461 N.W.2d 562 (1990).
Credit against statutory minimum sentence for inpatient treatment was erroneous, and it was within the district court's power to modify the judgment by striking the illegal credit. State v. Oliver, 230 Neb. 864, 434 N.W.2d 293 (1989).
In a case pending appeal when this section was amended, a sentence of lifetime suspension of a driver's license for driving while under the influence should be vacated and in lieu thereof a sentence of suspension for 15 years imposed. State v. Painter, 224 Neb. 905, 402 N.W.2d 677 (1987).
Where the record did not show the defendant knew the penalty for second offense DWI included a mandatory minimum confinement under subsection (2) (of former section 39-669.07) when he entered his plea, the cause was remanded to determine if the defendant had such knowledge in fact. State v. Stastny, 223 Neb. 903, 395 N.W.2d 492 (1986).
Upon revocation of probation, the court may impose such punishment as may have been imposed originally for the crime of which such defendant was convicted. Resultingly, defendant who was convicted of third offense driving while intoxicated in 1980 and who violated his probation in 1984 was subject to sentencing under the penal statute in effect at the time of his conviction. State v. Jacobson, 221 Neb. 639, 379 N.W.2d 772 (1986).
A defendant's operator's license may not be suspended beyond one year from the judgment of conviction; that is, in this case, one year from the date sentence of probation was imposed. State v. Schulz, 221 Neb. 473, 378 N.W.2d 165 (1985).
Under subsection (1) of this section (former section 39-669.07), the court-ordered suspending of driving privileges must be for a continuous period computed from the date the order of probation is entered. State v. Ramirez, 218 Neb. 899, 360 N.W.2d 484 (1984).
A trial court does not have the authority under this section to interrupt the period of suspension or permit one convicted of driving under the influence of alcoholic liquor or drug, first or second offense, to drive for limited work-related purposes. On second offense the period of prohibition against driving must be for a period of six continuous months computed from the date the order of probation is entered. State v. Havorka, 218 Neb. 367, 355 N.W.2d 343 (1984).
A sentence within the statutory maximum will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. State v. Rosenberry, 209 Neb. 383, 307 N.W.2d 823 (1981).
A sentence validly imposed takes effect from the time it is imposed, and the subsequent order of the same court vacating that sentence was a nullity. State v. Sliva, 208 Neb. 647, 305 N.W.2d 10 (1981).
Maximum sentence under this statute not excessive in view of defendant's record. State v. Phillips, 197 Neb. 343, 248 N.W.2d 773 (1977).
Sentence of imprisonment for one year and revocation of driver's license was not an abuse of discretion by the trial court. State v. Frans, 192 Neb. 641, 223 N.W.2d 490 (1974).
A requirement that one convicted of driving while intoxicated attend and complete and pay for an alcohol abuse course is a valid condition of probation. State v. Muggins, 192 Neb. 415, 222 N.W.2d 289 (1974).
A license revocation ordered pursuant to this section begins at the time appointed in the court's order. State v. Lankford, 17 Neb. App. 123, 756 N.W.2d 739 (2008).