State v. Billingsley, 961 N.W.2d 539

Billingsley was charged by information on Sept. 3, 2019 with first-degree assault, third-degree assault, and disturbing the peace. A plea in abatement had been filed Aug. 28, 2019; it was denied Dec. 5, 2019.
The statutory six‑month speedy‑trial deadline (computed from filing) yielded March 3, 2020 as the unextended deadline.
COVID‑19 disrupted court operations; multiple telephonic conferences and scheduling delays occurred in April–June 2020. The court set trial for June 30, 2020 on June 1, 2020.
On June 25, 2020 the prosecutor moved to continue trial (supported by an affidavit) because three treating doctors were unavailable without court orders and the prosecutor tested positive for COVID‑19 five days before trial. The court granted the continuance over Billingsley’s objection.
Billingsley moved for absolute discharge on speedy‑trial grounds on Aug. 11, 2020; the district court denied the motion. On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, concluding the State proved additional excludable time (including a continuance from June 26–Aug. 11, 2020).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether days in Apr–June 2020 (COVID scheduling delays) are excludable under § 29‑1207(4)(f)	Billingsley: No admissible evidence supports the court’s finding; court statements alone insufficient	State: Pandemic restrictions justified good‑cause exclusion	Court did not resolve; assumed arguendo they were not excluded and proceeded to other grounds for affirmance
Whether the continuance granted June 26, 2020 at the prosecutor’s request is excludable under § 29‑1207(4)(c)(i) and (ii)	Billingsley: State failed to meet its burden to show due diligence, unavailability, and exceptional circumstances	State: Prosecutor’s affidavit showed material witness unavailability, due diligence to secure testimony, and exceptional circumstances (prosecutor’s COVID diagnosis and witness logistics)	Held excludable: affidavit satisfied statutory requirements; 46 days excluded (June 26–Aug 11)
Whether Billingsley was entitled to absolute discharge when he moved on Aug. 11, 2020	Billingsley: Trial deadline had passed and motion was timely	State: With excluded periods, the deadline extended into September 2020 so motion was premature	Held: Motion premature; denial affirmed

State v. Jennings, 308 Neb. 835, 957 N.W.2d 143 (2021) (trial‑court speedy‑trial dismissal reviewed for clear error)
State v. Chapman, 307 Neb. 443, 949 N.W.2d 490 (2020) (method for computing statutory six‑month speedy‑trial period)
State v. Lovvorn, 303 Neb. 844, 932 N.W.2d 64 (2019) (extensions of trial period by excluded delays)
State v. Williams, 277 Neb. 133, 761 N.W.2d 514 (2009) (pleas in abatement toll speedy‑trial computation until disposition)
State v. Robertson, 294 Neb. 29, 881 N.W.2d 864 (2016) (continuance exclusions for exceptional circumstances)
State v. Baird, 259 Neb. 245, 609 N.W.2d 349 (2000) (evidentiary sufficiency for speed‑trial exclusion challenges)
State v. Turner, 252 Neb. 620, 564 N.W.2d 231 (1997) (trial court discretion on continuances)