State v. Huston, 903 N.W.2d 907

Brianna L. Huston pled guilty in November 2016 to first-offense driving during revocation in Hall County; plea agreement included 45 days jail and 6 months probation.
The county court sentenced Huston to 45 days jail, 6 months probation, and ordered a 1-year revocation of her driver’s license, concluding revocation was mandatory under Nebraska law then in effect.
The county court relied on this court’s interpretation in State v. Frederick that § 60-4,108 required a mandatory 1-year revocation for a first offense, even when probation was imposed.
Huston appealed the revocation to the district court, which affirmed; she then appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
While her appeal was pending, 2017 Neb. Laws, L.B. 263 amended § 60-4,108 to make license revocation discretionary (rather than mandatory) when the offender is placed on probation.
The Supreme Court considered whether the amendment, enacted before final judgment, applied retroactively to mitigate Huston’s sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the 2017 amendment to § 60-4,108 apply to Huston even though offense occurred before amendment?	Huston: Randolph doctrine entitles her to the milder penalty when amendment is enacted before final judgment.	State: Amendment does not apply or should not alter the sentence already imposed.	Held: Amendment applies retroactively because it mitigates punishment and was enacted before final mandate.
Did the county court err by revoking Huston’s license for 1 year without discretion?	Huston: Court was required to have discretion under the amended statute and thus revocation as mandatory was error.	State: Revocation was required under the statute as interpreted in Frederick at the time of sentencing.	Held: Plain error; county court was bound by prior law then but must be allowed discretion on resentencing under amended statute.
Is resentencing required?	Huston: Yes, because revocation portion must be reconsidered under amended statute.	State: Sentence was within statutory limits and could remain.	Held: Resentencing required; sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing consistent with amended § 60-4,108.
Must the court decide other assigned errors?	Huston: Raised timing of revocation start and other issues.	State: N/A.	Held: No need to address other assignments because vacatur and remand resolve the case.

State v. Frederick, 291 Neb. 243 (court previously held revocation was required for first-offense driving during revocation)
State v. Randolph, 186 Neb. 297 (amendment mitigating punishment applies if enacted before final judgment)
State v. Lantz, 290 Neb. 757 (clarifies application of Randolph retroactivity rule)
State v. Chacon, 296 Neb. 203 (applied retroactive relief principles)