Bohlen v. Kissack

Nebraska Supreme Court

Bohlen v. Kissack

202 N.W.2d 171, 189 Neb. 262, 1972 Neb. LEXIS 701

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 17, 1972

DocketNo. 38478

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 202 N.W.2d 171 (Bohlen v. Kissack) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bohlen v. Kissack, 202 N.W.2d 171, 189 Neb. 262, 1972 Neb. LEXIS 701 (Neb. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Spencer, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the district court for Buffalo County, upholding the revocation of the motor vehicle operator’s license of Glenn L. Bohlen by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

The revocation of appellant’s license was based upon the accumulation of points in five separate convictions for violations of various traffic laws of Nebraska over a 2-year period. Appellant premises his action on the alleged invalidity of three of those traffic convictions, and the unconstitutionality of section 39-7,129, R. R. S. 1943. We affirm.

Appellant predicates his claim of jurisdictional defects on the fact that the three complaints on which the convictions were obtained were filed by persons other than the county attorney; that the record does not indicate the county attorney consented to their filing; and that the court did not receive from the complainants a bond with sufficient sureties to indemnify for wrongful or malicious prosecution, as required by section 29-404, R. S. Supp., 1972. The statute provides a procedural requirement to protect an individual from the filing of false complaints. Granted that it was not complied with in the three cases as alleged by the appellant, the complaints were processed to conviction and the issue was not raised. The judgments of conviction were not void, nor even voidable. No appeals were taken from the convictions, and those judgments became final.

In Stauffer v. Weedlun (1972), 188 Neb. 105, 195 N. W. 2d 218, we indicated that in addition to the judicial review of records of the Director of Motor Vehicles it is only completely void judgments, erroneous or fraud[264]*264ulent records, and abstracts of convictions which may be challenged at the evidentiary hearing provided for in the district court de novo review of the order revoking a driver’s license.

Appellant’s attack on the constitutionality of section 39-7,129, R. R. S. 1943, is fully answered in Stauffer v. Weedlun (1972), 188 Neb. 105, 195 N. W. 2d 218, and State v. Lessert (1972), 188 Neb. 243, 196 N. W. 2d 166.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Spencer, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the district court for Buffalo County, upholding the revocation of the motor vehicle operator’s license of Glenn L. Bohlen by the Director of Motor Vehicles.

The revocation of appellant’s license was based upon the accumulation of points in five separate convictions for violations of various traffic laws of Nebraska over a 2-year period. Appellant premises his action on the alleged invalidity of three of those traffic convictions, and the unconstitutionality of section 39-7,129, R. R. S. 1943. We affirm.

Appellant predicates his claim of jurisdictional defects on the fact that the three complaints on which the convictions were obtained were filed by persons other than the county attorney; that the record does not indicate the county attorney consented to their filing; and that the court did not receive from the complainants a bond with sufficient sureties to indemnify for wrongful or malicious prosecution, as required by section 29-404, R. S. Supp., 1972. The statute provides a procedural requirement to protect an individual from the filing of false complaints. Granted that it was not complied with in the three cases as alleged by the appellant, the complaints were processed to conviction and the issue was not raised. The judgments of conviction were not void, nor even voidable. No appeals were taken from the convictions, and those judgments became final.

In Stauffer v. Weedlun (1972), 188 Neb. 105, 195 N. W. 2d 218, we indicated that in addition to the judicial review of records of the Director of Motor Vehicles it is only completely void judgments, erroneous or fraud[264]*264ulent records, and abstracts of convictions which may be challenged at the evidentiary hearing provided for in the district court de novo review of the order revoking a driver’s license.

Appellant’s attack on the constitutionality of section 39-7,129, R. R. S. 1943, is fully answered in Stauffer v. Weedlun (1972), 188 Neb. 105, 195 N. W. 2d 218, and State v. Lessert (1972), 188 Neb. 243, 196 N. W. 2d 166.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 N.W.2d 171, 189 Neb. 262, 1972 Neb. LEXIS 701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bohlen-v-kissack-neb-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack