State v. Raatz
294 Neb. 852
| Neb. | 2016Background
- In November 2014, Corey J. Raatz was involved in events that led to a fire destroying two semi-tractors and a trailer; he was later charged with criminal mischief (Class IV felony).
- Raatz was arrested in March 2015; the State charged him in April 2015 and he pled no contest on December 21, 2015.
- The Legislature enacted L.B. 605, effective August 30, 2015, which revised sentencing for Class IV felonies and added § 29-2204.02 requiring probation for Class IV felonies unless substantial and compelling reasons support incarceration.
- At sentencing (Feb. 19, 2016) Raatz argued § 29-2204.02 required probation because sentencing occurred after L.B. 605’s effective date.
- The district court concluded L.B. 605 did not apply retroactively to offenses committed before August 30, 2015 (per § 28-116 and related provisions) and sentenced Raatz to 20–40 months’ imprisonment; Raatz appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 29-2204.02 (L.B. 605) applies to offenses committed before Aug. 30, 2015 | Raatz: sentencing occurred after L.B. 605; Randolph doctrine entitles him to mitigated punishment | State: L.B. 605 includes express nonretroactivity provisions for offenses committed before Aug. 30, 2015 | Held: § 29-2204.02 does not apply; Legislature expressly precluded retroactivity |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing imprisonment instead of probation | Raatz: even if § 29-2204.02 inapplicable, court should have granted probation | State: sentencing court reasonably relied on defendant’s extensive criminal history and suitability factors | Held: No abuse of discretion; 20–40 months within statutory limits and supported by record |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Randolph, 186 Neb. 297, 183 N.W.2d 225 (establishes that ameliorative criminal statutes generally apply if enacted after commission but before final judgment, absent legislative direction)
- State v. Draper, 289 Neb. 777, 857 N.W.2d 334 (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
- State v. Sikes, 286 Neb. 38, 834 N.W.2d 609 (appellate review of sentences: will not disturb within statutory limits absent abuse of discretion)