Dugan v. State, 297 Neb. 444

Michael Dugan was arrested in Wyoming and returned to Nebraska after waiving extradition; the Nebraska arrest warrant was issued after he was taken into custody.
Charged in Cheyenne County with theft by unlawful taking; he moved to reduce bail and for absolute discharge alleging unlawful arrest/extradition.
Dugan’s appeal of the bail denial was dismissed by the Court of Appeals for lack of jurisdiction; he also filed a federal habeas petition while state proceedings continued.
The trial proceeded while Dugan’s interlocutory appeals (bail reduction and absolute discharge) and federal habeas were pending; he was convicted, sentenced as a habitual criminal, and committed.
Dugan voluntarily dismissed his appeal from the denial of absolute discharge as interlocutory; his direct appeal of conviction failed. He then sought state habeas relief claiming the trial court lacked jurisdiction during the pending interlocutory appeals; the district court dismissed the habeas petition with prejudice.

Issue	Dugan's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court was divested of jurisdiction by Dugan’s interlocutory appeal of the bail-reduction order	Dugan: The pending appeal from denial of bail deprived the trial court of jurisdiction, rendering subsequent proceedings void	State: The bail-order appeal was not from a final order; the Court of Appeals never acquired jurisdiction, so trial court retained jurisdiction	Court: Bail appeal was interlocutory and did not divest trial court of jurisdiction; no void judgment
Whether the trial court was divested of jurisdiction by Dugan’s interlocutory appeal from denial of absolute discharge based on unlawful arrest/extradition	Dugan: The appeal from denial of absolute discharge was final and divested the trial court of jurisdiction, making the conviction void	State: The motion challenged arrest/extradition (not a speedy-trial statutory claim); denial was not a final order affecting a substantial right, so appeal did not divest jurisdiction	Court: Denial was not final because it did not affect a substantial right (it did not raise a right not to be tried); unlawful arrest/extradition claims are collateral and do not prevent trial; conviction not void

State v. Kula, 254 Neb. 962, 579 N.W.2d 541 (Neb. 1998) (discussing finality of orders for appeal)
State v. Williams, 277 Neb. 133, 761 N.W.2d 514 (Neb. 2009) (ruling that denial of statutory speedy-trial discharge is a final, appealable order)
State v. Loyd, 269 Neb. 762, 696 N.W.2d 860 (Neb. 2005) (denial of motion styled as discharge based on statute of limitations was not final)
State v. Tingle, 239 Neb. 558, 477 N.W.2d 544 (Neb. 1991) (unlawful arrest or extradition does not deprive a court of power to try an accused)