Weir v. State

Nebraska Supreme Court

Weir v. State

236 N.W. 185, 121 Neb. 129, 1931 Neb. LEXIS 110

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedApril 24, 1931

DocketNo. 27834

StatusPublished

This text of 236 N.W. 185 (Weir v. State) 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

Weir v. State, 236 N.W. 185, 121 Neb. 129, 1931 Neb. LEXIS 110 (Neb. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this case an indictment was returned by a grand jury impaneled in Nuckolls county, Nebraska, charging the defendant Aldrich (plaintiff in error) and another with an offense. To this indictment the defendant Aldrich interposed a plea in abatement, which was tried to the court and by it overruled. From that decision the defendant prosecutes error. The record discloses that this proceeding in error is here presented by stipulation of the parties, and that, pending its determination, proceedings in the case below are by agreement continued, and also that no final disposition thereof had been made at the time of this hearing.

The rulings of the district court in a criminal case cannot be reviewed by this court prior to the rendition of final judgment in the prosecution, and consent of the parties [130]*130is incapable of conferring jurisdiction of the subject-matter.

■ “An order of the district court overruling a plea in abatement to an indictment is not a final order within the meaning of the statute, and a petition in error cannot be prosecuted therefrom previous to the prisoner’s conviction.” Gartner v. State, 36 Neb. 280. See Green v. State, 10 Neb. 102; Farrington v. State, 116 Neb. 712.

The present condition of this record therefore necessitates the dismissal of the petition in error for want of jurisdiction.

Dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

In this case an indictment was returned by a grand jury impaneled in Nuckolls county, Nebraska, charging the defendant Aldrich (plaintiff in error) and another with an offense. To this indictment the defendant Aldrich interposed a plea in abatement, which was tried to the court and by it overruled. From that decision the defendant prosecutes error. The record discloses that this proceeding in error is here presented by stipulation of the parties, and that, pending its determination, proceedings in the case below are by agreement continued, and also that no final disposition thereof had been made at the time of this hearing.

The rulings of the district court in a criminal case cannot be reviewed by this court prior to the rendition of final judgment in the prosecution, and consent of the parties [130]*130is incapable of conferring jurisdiction of the subject-matter.

■ “An order of the district court overruling a plea in abatement to an indictment is not a final order within the meaning of the statute, and a petition in error cannot be prosecuted therefrom previous to the prisoner’s conviction.” Gartner v. State, 36 Neb. 280. See Green v. State, 10 Neb. 102; Farrington v. State, 116 Neb. 712.

The present condition of this record therefore necessitates the dismissal of the petition in error for want of jurisdiction.

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 N.W. 185, 121 Neb. 129, 1931 Neb. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weir-v-state-neb-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack