In re Interest of Elainna R., 298 Neb. 436

On Nov. 17, 2016, Elainna R., a Lincoln Southeast High School student, physically attacked another student (A.L.) in a hallway, striking her head and grabbing her hair; the altercation lasted 2–3 minutes.
School campus supervisor and security officer Sief Mahagoub intervened, commanded the students to stop, physically attempted to separate them, and ended up on the floor during the scuffle.
Mahagoub testified the fight was “very intense,” disruptive to the school day, and required use of his training to prevent harm; an associate principal corroborated the disruptive nature and Elainna’s role as aggressor.
Elainna was petitioned under Lincoln Mun. Code § 9.20.050 (disturbing the peace — engaging in fighting) and adjudicated delinquent under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(1); she appealed.
On appeal, Elainna argued a school security officer cannot be a victim under the ordinance (analogizing them to police officers) and that the evidence was insufficient to support adjudication.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a school security officer/campus supervisor may be a victim under Lincoln’s disturbing-the-peace ordinance	State: ordinance’s plain language covers "any person," so school security officers are proper victims	Elainna: safety officers akin to police; officers have no expectation of peace from fighting/fighting-words defense	Held: Yes. A school security officer/campus supervisor may be a victim under the ordinance
Whether the evidence was sufficient to adjudicate Elainna under § 43-247(1)	State: Elainna’s physical fighting, refusal to stop, and forcible hair-pulling disturbed Mahagoub’s peace	Elainna: no fighting-words toward Mahagoub; insufficient to show disturbance of his peace	Held: Yes. The physical conduct and need for Mahagoub to intervene supported a reasonable inference he was disturbed; evidence proved the allegation beyond a reasonable doubt

State v. Broadstone, 233 Neb. 595 (affirming that offensive words can be "fighting words" and rejecting reduced protection for officers)
State v. Boss, 195 Neb. 467 (holding words constituting abuse toward an officer can be "fighting words")
State v. Groves, 219 Neb. 382 (affirming disorderly conduct conviction and rejecting that officers are less susceptible to abuse)
State v. Moore, 226 Neb. 347 (affirming disturbing-the-peace conviction based on totality of conduct in officer’s presence)
State v. McNair, 178 Neb. 763 (defining "disturb" as throwing into disorder or interrupting a settled state)
In re Interest of LeVanta S., 295 Neb. 151 (standard that disturbing-the-peace allegations must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in juvenile adjudications)
Jindra v. Clayton, 247 Neb. 597 (permitting reasonable inferences from proved facts to support findings)