State v. Hassan, 309 Neb. 644

Hassan was charged in Hall County with drug offenses, released, and ordered by county court to appear for a preliminary hearing on October 24 (a Thursday).
Hassan did not appear; the county court issued a bench warrant that same day and a warrant return shows Hassan was arrested on Monday, October 28.
After the case was bound over, the State prosecuted Hassan in district court for willfully failing to appear or to surrender within 3 days under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-908.
The State introduced exhibit 7 (county court records: journal entry ordering appearance, notation of failure to appear, bench warrant, and warrant return); Hassan objected on hearsay/public-records grounds; the district court overruled the objection.
At trial Hassan was acquitted of possession charges but convicted of failure to appear and sentenced to 10 days (with credit for time served).

Issue	State's Argument	Hassan's Argument	Held
Admissibility of county-court records (exhibit 7)	Records are admissible; at least the court order is a verbal act and not hearsay; admissible parts justify admitting the exhibit as a whole.	Exhibit 7 is hearsay and not properly admitted under public-records exception.	Court: Overruled. The journal entry ordering appearance is a verbal act (not hearsay); an exhibit containing admissible parts may be admitted even if other parts are hearsay.
Sufficiency of evidence re: 3-day surrender period under § 29-908	§ 25-2221 (time-computation statute) does not apply; the 3 days in § 29-908 mean 3 calendar days, so arrest on Monday (four days later) supports conviction.	§ 25-2221 requires excluding the day of the act and extending the deadline past Sunday to Monday, so Hassan surrendered within the lawful period (arrest Monday) and cannot be convicted.	Court: Held § 25-2221 does not apply because the 3-day surrender is not an act "in any action or proceeding"; use plain meaning (3 calendar days). Evidence was sufficient to support conviction.

State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448 (2008) (standard of review for hearsay rulings: factual findings for clear error, admissibility de novo)
State v. Poe, 292 Neb. 60 (2015) (definition and exclusions for hearsay; out-of-court statements offered for non-truth purposes)
State v. McCave, 282 Neb. 500 (2011) (verbal acts—court orders—as non-hearsay)
State v. Merrill, 252 Neb. 736 (1997) (admissible parts of an exhibit can justify overruling objection to whole exhibit)
State v. Valdez, 236 Neb. 627 (1990) (elements of § 29-908 failure-to-appear offense)
State ex rel. Wieland v. Beermann, 246 Neb. 808 (1994) (past application of § 25-2221 in timing disputes and interpretive discussion)
In re Guardianship of Eliza W., 304 Neb. 995 (2020) (statutory interpretation principles; plain meaning of statutory language)
U.S. v. Dupree, 706 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 2013) (federal recognition that court commands are legally operative verbal acts)