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.
The county court believed license revocation was mandatory 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 her appeal was pending, the Legislature enacted L.B. 263 (effective Aug. 24, 2017), amending § 60-4,108 to make revocation discretionary if the offender is placed on probation.
The Supreme Court considered whether the amendment, which mitigates punishment, applies retroactively to Huston because her judgment was not final while the appeal was pending.

Issue	Huston	State	Held
Whether the 2017 amendment to § 60-4,108 applies to Huston’s sentence	The amendment mitigates punishment and should apply while appeal was pending	Section previously required mandatory 1-year revocation per Frederick; amendment should not affect final sentences	Amendment applies retroactively because it mitigates punishment and Huston’s judgment was not final; county court should have discretion to revoke when placing on probation
Whether the mandatory revocation imposed at sentencing was error requiring relief	Revocation was improper under the amended statute and she’s entitled to resentencing	Mandatory revocation was required under then-existing statutory interpretation (Frederick)	Court vacated entire sentence and remanded for resentencing consistent with amended § 60-4,108

State v. Frederick, 291 Neb. 243 (court interpreted § 60-4,108 to require mandatory 1-year revocation)
State v. Randolph, 186 Neb. 297 (statute mitigating punishment enacted after offense but before final judgment applies retroactively)
State v. Lantz, 290 Neb. 757 (applying Randolph principle)
State v. Chacon, 296 Neb. 203 (retroactive relief principles)