Opinion ID: 1711506
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: decision of court of appeals

Text: The Court of Appeals reversed the orders of the juvenile court finding that [t]he language of § 43-271 is plain and unambiguous. It applies only to those juveniles entering the juvenile court system through the temporary custody process set forth in § 43-248. In re Interest of Brandy M. et al., 4 Neb.App. 115, 119, 539 N.W.2d 280, 283 (1995). The record before the court did not indicate that any of the juveniles involved in the cases on appeal had at one time, without the issuance of a warrant, been in the temporary custody of an officer of the peace pursuant to § 43-248. Accordingly, the juveniles did not have a statutory right to adjudication within 6 months. Moreover, the Court of Appeals found that even if there were a statutory speedy trial right applicable to the cases filed pursuant to § 43-247(1) and (2), because the Legislature failed to specify a consequence for the failure to provide a trial within 6 months, the 6-month time limit was merely directory rather than mandatory. Thus, for a juvenile to have his or her petition dismissed, he or she must show prejudice. The Court of Appeals did note that of the 10 cases involved in the instant appeal, one case was filed pursuant to § 43-247(3)(b) and that § 43-278 provided this juvenile with a statutory right to an adjudication hearing within 90 days. However, the Court of Appeals found the use of the word shall in § 43-278 was likewise directory. Accordingly, this juvenile must demonstrate prejudice in order to obtain an absolute discharge.