Opinion ID: 4289723
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: standard of review

Text: [1-5] In an appeal of a criminal case from the county court, the district court acts as an intermediate court of appeals, and its review is limited to an examination of the record for error or abuse of discretion.6 Both the district court and a higher appellate court generally review appeals from the county court for error appearing on the record.7 When reviewing a judgment for errors appearing on the record, an appellate court’s inquiry is whether the decision conforms to the law, is supported by competent evidence, and is neither arbitrary, capricious, nor unreasonable.8 But we independently review questions of law in appeals from the county court.9 When deciding appeals from criminal convictions in county court, we apply the same standards of review that we apply to decide appeals from criminal convictions in district court.10 6 State v. Avey, 288 Neb. 233, 846 N.W.2d 662 (2014). 7 Id. 8 Id. 9 Id. 10 Id. - 863 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 299 Nebraska R eports STATE v. THALKEN Cite as 299 Neb. 857 [6] In reviewing a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress based on a claimed violation of the Fourth Amendment, an appellate court applies a two-part standard of review.11 Regarding historical facts, an appellate court reviews the trial court’s findings for clear error, but whether those facts trigger or violate Fourth Amendment protections is a question of law that an appellate court reviews independently of the trial court’s determination.12 [7] The interpretation of a statute presents a question of law.13