State v. Huston, 298 Neb. 323

In Nov 2016 Brianna L. Huston pled guilty to first-offense driving during revocation; county court sentenced her to 45 days jail, 6 months probation, and revoked her license for 1 year.
At sentencing the county court believed it was required to impose a 1-year revocation under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-4,108 as interpreted in State v. Frederick.
Huston appealed the revocation to the district court, which affirmed; she then appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
While Huston’s appeal was pending, the Legislature enacted L.B. 263 (effective Aug 24, 2017), amending § 60-4,108 to permit the court discretion to order revocation when the defendant is placed on probation.
The Supreme Court analyzed whether the amendment mitigated punishment and thus applied retroactively under State v. Randolph, and whether the county court’s mandatory revocation was therefore plain error.

Issue	Huston’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether L.B. 263’s amendment to § 60-4,108 applies retroactively to reduce punishment when amendment becomes effective while appeal is pending	Amendment mitigates punishment and should apply because final judgment had not issued; so revocation was not mandatory	Amendment should not affect Huston’s sentence (implicit) or does not relieve mandatory revocation imposed at sentencing	Amendment mitigates punishment and applies retroactively under Randolph because judgment was not final; county court should have had discretion to revoke when probation imposed
Whether the county court committed reversible error by ordering immediate 1-year revocation for a probationary first-offense	Court lacked discretion at time of sentencing and therefore imposed mandatory revocation contrary to the later-enacted discretionary rule; relief warranted	County court acted within statutory limits in place at sentencing; even under new law revocation could still be imposed	Because the amendment applies retroactively, the mandatory revocation was plain error; sentence vacated and case remanded for resentencing consistent with amended § 60-4,108

State v. Frederick, 291 Neb. 243 (court interpreted § 60-4,108 to require 1-year revocation for first-offense driving during revocation)
State v. Randolph, 186 Neb. 297 (establishes that a mitigating statutory amendment that takes effect before final judgment governs punishment)
State v. Lantz, 290 Neb. 757 (discusses Randolph retroactivity principles)
State v. Chacon, 296 Neb. 203 (applied retroactivity principles in sentencing context)