Dugan v. State, 297 Neb. 444

Michael Dugan was arrested in Wyoming under a Nebraska warrant that had not been issued until after his custody; he waived extradition and was returned to Nebraska and charged with theft.
Dugan moved to reduce excessive bail; that motion was denied and his appeal to the Nebraska Court of Appeals was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as interlocutory.
Dugan filed a federal habeas petition and a trial-court motion for absolute discharge alleging defective warrant and improper extradition; the trial court denied the discharge motion and Dugan appealed that denial to the Court of Appeals.
Trial proceeded while the appeal from the denial of the motion for absolute discharge (and a federal habeas action) was pending; Dugan was convicted and sentenced as a habitual criminal; he later stipulated to dismissal of the interlocutory appeal from the discharge denial.
After direct appeal failed, Dugan sought state habeas relief arguing his conviction was void because the trial court lacked jurisdiction while his interlocutory appeals were pending; the district court dismissed his habeas petition and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court was divested of jurisdiction by interlocutory appeal of bail reduction denial	Dugan: pending appeal deprived trial court of jurisdiction so trial, conviction, and sentence are void	State: bail-appeal was not perfected because order was nonfinal; trial court retained jurisdiction	Court: appeal was not perfected; trial court retained jurisdiction — no void judgment
Whether trial court was divested of jurisdiction by interlocutory appeal of denial of motion for absolute discharge (based on illegal arrest/extradition)	Dugan: denial was a final appealable order; pendency deprived trial court of jurisdiction making conviction void	State: motion challenged arrest/extradition (collateral matters), not a right not to be tried; denial was nonfinal	Court: denial was not a final order; allegations of unlawful arrest/extradition do not affect a substantial right preventing trial — no void judgment
Whether allegations of unlawful arrest/extradition can support absolute discharge pretrial	Dugan: alleged defects in warrant and extradition warranted discharge	State: illegality of arrest/extradition does not impair court’s power to try accused; remedies are collateral (suppression or civil action)	Court: unlawful arrest/extradition provide collateral remedies but do not bar trial; discharge motion mislabeled and not final

State v. Kula, 254 Neb. 962, 579 N.W.2d 541 (discussing finality of pretrial orders in Nebraska)
State v. Williams, 277 Neb. 133, 761 N.W.2d 514 (ruling that denial of statutory speedy-trial absolute discharge is final and appealable)
State v. Loyd, 269 Neb. 762, 696 N.W.2d 860 (denial of motion styled as discharge based on statute of limitations is not final)
State v. Tingle, 239 Neb. 558, 477 N.W.2d 544 (illegality of arrest does not bar trial)
Pettibone v. Nichols, 203 U.S. 192 (arrest/extradition defects do not defeat jurisdiction to try)
Mahon v. Justice, 127 U.S. 700 (same principle regarding power of court to try despite arrest/extradition issues)