Opinion ID: 4375177
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: [1] 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.3 Regarding historical facts, an appellate court reviews the trial court’s findings for clear error, giving due weight to the 1 State v. Watts, 209 Neb. 371, 307 N.W.2d 816 (1981). 2 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 24-1106(3) (Supp. 2017). 3 State v. Thalken, 299 Neb. 857, 911 N.W.2d 562 (2018). - 968 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 301 Nebraska R eports STATE v. SECKINGER Cite as 301 Neb. 963 inferences drawn from those facts by the trial judge.4 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.5