State v. A.D., 939 N.W.2d 484

The State charged A.D. (Class II first‑degree sexual assault) and C.M. (Class IIA possession of a stolen firearm) with felonies allegedly committed when each was older than 14 but younger than 18.
Each defendant moved in county court to transfer the criminal prosecution to juvenile court under Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29‑1816 and 43‑276.
The county court held it lacked jurisdiction to decide the transfer motions and scheduled preliminary hearings; defendants filed appeals before preliminary hearings occurred.
After this Court’s decision in State v. Bluett, the Legislature amended § 29‑1816 to permit appeals from orders granting or denying transfer within 10 days; defendants filed timely notices, but the State argued the county court had not actually granted or denied transfer.
The Supreme Court concluded county courts are statutorily limited: where they lack jurisdiction to try felony matters, they also lack authority to decide motions to transfer those felony cases to juvenile court; such transfer questions must be addressed by the district court after bindover.
Because the county court lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction over the transfer motions, the Nebraska Supreme Court found it likewise lacked appellate jurisdiction and dismissed the appeals.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a county court has jurisdiction to decide a motion to transfer a felony prosecution to juvenile court	County courts have concurrent jurisdiction under § 43‑246.01(3) and may arraign and accept transfer motions under § 29‑1816; the arraignment/advice language contemplates county‑court transfer rulings	County courts are courts of limited, statutory jurisdiction; references to “county court or district court” must be read against each court’s existing jurisdictional grant, so county courts that lack authority to try felonies cannot decide transfer motions	County courts lack authority to decide transfer motions in felony cases they do not have jurisdiction to try; appeals dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

Green v. Seiffert, 304 Neb. 212, 933 N.W.2d 590 (2019) (jurisdictional questions not involving factual disputes are reviewed de novo).
Griffith v. Nebraska Dept. of Corr. Servs., 304 Neb. 287, 934 N.W.2d 169 (2019) (statutory interpretation is a question of law reviewed independently).
In re Estate of Evertson, 295 Neb. 301, 889 N.W.2d 73 (2016) (county courts are statutorily created courts of limited jurisdiction).
State v. Bluett, 295 Neb. 369, 889 N.W.2d 83 (2016) (pre‑amendment denial of transfer was not a final, appealable order).
State v. Uhing, 301 Neb. 768, 919 N.W.2d 909 (2018) (post‑Bluett jurisprudence on transfer appeals).
State v. Schanaman, 286 Neb. 125, 835 N.W.2d 66 (2013) (county courts generally cannot try felony cases; they conduct preliminary hearings).
In re Interest of Tyrone K., 295 Neb. 193, 887 N.W.2d 489 (2016) (county court judges may act as juvenile court where no separate juvenile court exists).
State v. Wilkinson, 219 Neb. 685, 365 N.W.2d 478 (1985) (county court acting as examining magistrate at preliminary hearing may discharge or bind over).
State v. Tyler P., 299 Neb. 959, 911 N.W.2d 260 (2018) (the court having jurisdiction over a pending criminal prosecution must apply § 43‑276 factors when deciding waiver/transfer).
Rogers v. Jack’s Supper Club, 304 Neb. 605, 935 N.W.2d 754 (2019) (courts do not substitute their policy preferences for clear legislative allocations of authority).