Nebraska Statutes

§ 29-759 — Text of agreement

Nebraska § 29-759
JurisdictionNebraska
Ch. 29Criminal Procedure

This text of Nebraska § 29-759 (Text of agreement) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-759 (2026).

Text

The Agreement on Detainers is hereby enacted into law and entered into by this state with all other jurisdictions legally joining therein in the form substantially as follows: "TEXT OF THE AGREEMENT ON DETAINERS The contracting states solemnly agree that: Article I The party states find that charges outstanding against a prisoner, detainers based on untried indictments, informations or complaints, and difficulties in securing speedy trial of persons already incarcerated in other jurisdictions, produce uncertainties which obstruct programs of prisoner treatment and rehabilitation. Accordingly, it is the policy of the party states and the purpose of this agreement to encourage the expeditious and orderly disposition of such charges and determination of the proper status of any and all detain

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

Related

State v. Tucker
609 N.W.2d 306 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2000)
78 case citations
State v. Steele
624 N.W.2d 1 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2001)
67 case citations
State v. Williams
573 N.W.2d 106 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1997)
51 case citations
State v. Sklenar
690 N.W.2d 631 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2005)
36 case citations
State v. Rieger
600 N.W.2d 831 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1999)
35 case citations
State v. Reynolds
359 N.W.2d 93 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1984)
25 case citations
State v. McLeaney
578 N.W.2d 68 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
20 case citations
State v. Yzeta
983 N.W.2d 124 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2023)
13 case citations
State v. Nearhood
518 N.W.2d 165 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1994)
11 case citations
State v. Reed
668 N.W.2d 245 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2003)
11 case citations
State v. Boeggeman
316 Neb. 581 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2024)
9 case citations
State v. Harper
508 N.W.2d 584 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1993)
9 case citations
State v. Hernandez
730 N.W.2d 96 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2007)
8 case citations
State v. Meyer
588 N.W.2d 200 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
7 case citations
State v. Rieger
588 N.W.2d 206 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1999)
7 case citations
State v. Arthaloney
433 N.W.2d 545 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1989)
6 case citations
State v. Caldwell
639 N.W.2d 663 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2002)
6 case citations
State v. Harper
448 N.W.2d 407 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1989)
6 case citations
State v. McSwine
438 N.W.2d 778 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1989)
6 case citations
State v. Rouse
688 N.W.2d 889 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2004)
6 case citations

Legislative History

Source: Laws 1963, c. 154, § 1, p. 543. Annotations: 1. Detainer 2. Speedy trial 3. Sending and receiving states 4. Miscellaneous 1. Detainer A detainer for a prisoner who has been convicted but not sentenced does not relate to an "untried indictment, information or complaint" and thus does not trigger the procedural requirements of Article III of the interstate Agreement on Detainers. State v. Jimenez, 283 Neb. 95, 808 N.W.2d 352 (2012). For purposes of the Agreement on Detainers, a "detainer" is a notification filed with the institution in which an individual is serving a sentence, advising the prisoner that he is wanted to face criminal charges pending in another jurisdiction. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). A detainer is a notification filed with the institution in which an individual is serving a sentence, advising the prisoner that he or she is wanted to face criminal charges pending in another jurisdiction. More specifically, a detainer is a request filed by a criminal justice agency with the institution in which a prisoner is incarcerated, asking the institution either to hold the prisoner for the agency after his or her release or to notify the agency when release of the prisoner is imminent. A state writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, seeking the immediate delivery of a prisoner for trial on criminal charges, does not constitute a detainer. Mere notice of pending criminal charges is insufficient to invoke the provisions of the Agreement on Detainers. State v. Williams, 253 Neb. 619, 573 N.W.2d 106 (1997). Under the Agreement on Detainers, a detainer is a notification filed with the institution in which an individual is serving a sentence, advising the prisoner that he is wanted to face criminal charges pending in another jurisdiction. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). 2. Speedy trial A court may not apply Nebraska's 6-month speedy trial statute under section 29-1207 to determine whether a prisoner is timely brought to trial under article III(a) of the Agreement on Detainers. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). The Agreement on Detainers has separate speedy trial provisions depending upon whether its procedures are initiated by the prisoner or authorities in the jurisdiction where the charge is pending. Article III of the agreement prescribes the procedure by which a prisoner against whom a detainer has been lodged may demand a speedy disposition of outstanding charges. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). The 180-day trial limitation under article III(a) of the Agreement on Detainers begins to run on the day the prisoner's request for disposition of untried charges is received by the prosecutor and court of jurisdiction. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). Upon receipt of a prisoner's proper request for disposition of untried charges under article III of the Agreement on Detainers, authorities in the state where a charge is pending must bring the prisoner to trial within 180 days. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). When seeking a discharge on speedy trial grounds under article III(a) of the Agreement on Detainers, defense counsel's performance is deficient when he or she fails to present evidence showing the time limitation for trial under article III(a) has been triggered. The prisoner was prejudiced by counsel's failure when there was a reasonable probability that an appeal or petition for further review from the district court's denial of prisoner's motion to discharge would have resulted in a reversal had the evidence been submitted. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). The Agreement on Detainers controls a defendant's speedy trial rights when he or she is already incarcerated in another state or in a federal facility before an information is filed against the defendant in Nebraska. State v. Steele, 261 Neb. 541, 624 N.W.2d 1 (2001). Article III of the Agreement on Detainers prescribes the procedure by which a prisoner against whom a detainer has been lodged may demand a speedy disposition of outstanding charges. Upon receipt of a proper request for disposition under this article, the receiving state must bring the prisoner to trial within one hundred eighty days. Also, under this article, for a prisoner's demand for disposition of the charges to trigger the one hundred eighty day period, it must be made in the manner required by Article III. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). A ruling on a motion to discharge, based on the speedy trial provisions of the Agreement on Detainers, is a final, appealable order. State v. Rieger, 8 Neb. App. 20, 588 N.W.2d 206 (1999). Under Article III of the Agreement on Detainers, for a prisoner's demand for disposition to trigger the 180-day period, it must be made in the manner therein required. State v. Nearhood, 2 Neb. App. 915, 518 N.W.2d 165 (1994). 3. Sending and receiving states A prisoner is not returned to his original place of imprisonment when he is returned to the sending state simply to face pending charges. State v. Reed, 266 Neb. 641, 668 N.W.2d 245 (2003). If one jurisdiction is actively prosecuting a defendant on current and pending charges, the defendant is unable to stand trial in the state in which he requested final disposition until resolution of the pending charges in the sending state. State v. Reed, 266 Neb. 641, 668 N.W.2d 245 (2003). A ruling denying a motion to dismiss with prejudice for failure to bring an individual to trial within 120 days from the date of his or her arrival in the receiving state is a final, appealable order. The speedy trial provisions of the Agreement on Detainers are triggered only when a detainer is filed with the state where an individual is a prisoner by the state having untried charges pending against the individual. State v. Williams, 253 Neb. 619, 573 N.W.2d 106 (1997). Article IV of the Agreement on Detainers sets forth the procedures by which the authorities where the charges are pending may initiate the process whereby a prisoner is returned to the state for trial. In respect of any proceedings made possible under this article, trial shall be commenced within one hundred twenty days of the arrival of the prisoner in the receiving state. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). Article V(d) of this section permits the receiving state to prosecute a defendant not only for the charge or charges forming the basis of the detainer but also on all other charges arising out of the same transaction. State v. Steele, 7 Neb. App. 110, 578 N.W.2d 508 (1998). The right of a prisoner under Article IV(c) of the Agreement on Detainers to be tried within 120 days of being brought into the state is a statutory right and not a constitutional right. A prisoner may waive this right by not raising the issue prior to or during trial. State v. Harper, 2 Neb. App. 220, 508 N.W.2d 584 (1993). 4. Miscellaneous If an action for untried charges is not brought to trial within the time periods authorized by articles III and IV of the Agreement on Detainers, the action shall be dismissed with prejudice under article V(c) of the agreement. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). In a ruling on a motion to dismiss with prejudice based on alleged violations of the Agreement on Detainers, a trial court's pretrial factual findings regarding the application of provisions of the agreement will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly wrong. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). To avoid prolonged interference with rehabilitation programs, the Agreement on Detainers provides the procedure whereby persons who are imprisoned in one state or by the United States, and who are also charged with crimes in another state or by the United States, can be tried expeditiously for the pending charges while they are serving their current sentences. State v. Rieger, 270 Neb. 904, 708 N.W.2d 630 (2006). The Interstate Agreement on Detainers applies solely to persons who have entered upon a term of imprisonment and therefore does not include pretrial detainees. State v. Reed, 266 Neb. 641, 668 N.W.2d 245 (2003). The provisions of the Agreement on Detainers apply only when a detainer has been lodged against a prisoner who has entered a term of imprisonment in a party state. State v. Steele, 261 Neb. 541, 624 N.W.2d 1 (2001). In ruling on a motion to dismiss with prejudice based on alleged violations of the Agreement on Detainers, it is proper for the trial court to hold a pretrial evidentiary hearing to determine whether a detainer was filed against the defendant and, if a detainer was filed, to determine whether the provisions of the agreement were violated. The Agreement on Detainers provides the procedure whereby persons who are imprisoned in one state or by the United States, and who are also charged with crimes in another state or by the United States, can be tried expeditiously for the pending charges while they are serving their current sentences, in order to avoid prolonged interference with rehabilitation programs. Because the Agreement on Detainers is a congressionally sanctioned interstate compact, it is a federal law subject to federal construction and, thus, U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of the Agreement on Detainers are binding upon state courts. Articles IV and V of the Agreement on Detainers provide the procedures by which the authorities in the state where the charges are pending, the receiving state, may initiate the process whereby a prisoner is transferred to the receiving state for trial on the pending charges. State v. Williams, 253 Neb. 619, 573 N.W.2d 106 (1997). Habeas corpus is not the proper action to challenge the validity of a detainer based upon an untried complaint, where the state filing the detainer has not requested transfer of the prisoner. Wickline v. Gunter, 233 Neb. 878, 448 N.W.2d 584 (1989). Article V(c) of the Agreement on Detainers provides for dismissal of a pending complaint on which a detainer is based if the appropriate authority shall refuse or fail to accept custody of the prisoner against whom the charges are pending or fail to bring that prisoner to trial within the period provided in Article III or Article IV. The Agreement also provides the remedy of dismissal of charges with prejudice in those specific cases not including possible errors made by another party's prison officials. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). The Agreement on Detainers was designed to promote the expeditious and orderly disposition of outstanding charges against a prisoner and to determine the proper status of any and all detainers based on untried indictments, informations, or complaints. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). The provisions of the Agreement on Detainers apply only when a detainer has been lodged against a prisoner who has entered a term of imprisonment in a party state. State v. Reynolds, 218 Neb. 753, 359 N.W.2d 93 (1984). The phrase "unable to stand trial" included in article VI(a) of this section includes those periods of delay occasioned by the defendant. Failure to appear at a preliminary hearing due to re-incarceration is clearly an example of a delay occasioned by the defendant. State v. Meyer, 7 Neb. App. 963, 588 N.W.2d 200 (1998).

Nearby Sections

15
View on official source ↗

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Nebraska § 29-759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ne/29-759.