State v. Moore, 978 N.W.2d 327

On Dec. 16, 2020, the State filed an information charging Gregory Moore with second-degree murder in Scotts Bluff County (CR20-730). The same day, in a separate Scotts Bluff County case (CR20-249), the court found Moore incompetent to stand trial and committed him to the Lincoln Regional Center (LRC).
Moore filed a motion to continue his arraignment on Dec. 17, 2020, and on Dec. 23 filed a written not-guilty plea and purported waiver of appearance; no formal court acceptance or status hearing was entered on the record.
The State later moved for a status conference; a July 2021 LRC report and the CR20-249 docket showed Moore remained incompetent.
The district court excluded delay from Dec. 17, 2020 through Sept. 13, 2021 from the speedy-trial computation under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(a), (b), (d), and (f), relying principally on Moore’s incompetency in the other case.
Moore moved for discharge; the district court denied the motion. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding the State proved by the greater weight of the evidence that incompetency-related delay in the other case was excludable for speedy-trial purposes in the instant case.

Issue	State's Argument	Moore's Argument	Held
Whether delay from competency proceedings in another case is excludable under § 29-1207(4)(a)	Yes — § 29-1207(4)(a) excludes delay from "other proceedings concerning the defendant," which can include competency proceedings in another pending case	No — the "other proceedings" must be in the same case raising the speedy-trial claim	Held for State — text does not require proceedings to be in the same case; broadly construed, (4)(a) applies to other pending cases; exclusion proper where record shows incompetency and commitment
Whether delay from Moore's Dec. 17 motion to continue the arraignment and subsequent written plea/waiver is excludable under continuance/unavailability provisions ((4)(b), (d), (f))	Yes — defendant sought continuance and did not obtain a court-processed approval of the written waiver/plea; resulting delay is attributable to defendant	No — Moore had filed a written not-guilty plea and sought a status hearing; any delay should not be charged to him absent a court finding	Court did not need to decide this definitively — even if some of these exclusions were erroneous, the same period was already properly excluded under incompetency; concurrence urged trial courts to expressly accept/reject written pleas under § 29-4206

State v. Bixby, 311 Neb. 110, 971 N.W.2d 120 (2022) (speedy-trial determinations are factual and reviewed for clear error)
State v. Abernathy, 310 Neb. 880, 969 N.W.2d 871 (2022) (statutory speedy-trial framework and exclusions)
State v. Blocher, 307 Neb. 874, 951 N.W.2d 499 (2020) (§ 29-1207(4)(a) can apply to proceedings in other pending cases)
State v. Hernandez, 309 Neb. 299, 959 N.W.2d 769 (2021) (burden on State to prove excluded periods by greater weight of the evidence)
Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348 (1996) (trying an incompetent defendant violates due process)