State v. Reames, 953 N.W.2d 807

Reames was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced on March 17, 2020 to 1 year of probation with a condition to reside in Lancaster County and get permission before changing address.
At sentencing counsel stated Reames no longer wished to appeal and asked to withdraw her motion for appellate bond.
Reames signed an amended probation order on March 18; the court entered the amended order on March 20 allowing her to reside in Kansas (the other sentencing conditions remained).
Reames’ trial counsel filed a notice of appeal on April 17, 2020 (31 days after the March 17 sentencing order; 28 days after the March 20 amended order).
The Court of Appeals noted the notice was untimely as to the March 17 sentencing order but timely as to the March 20 amended order; Reames raised ineffective assistance for trial counsel’s failure to timely appeal the March 17 order.
New appellate counsel was appointed; the Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether it had jurisdiction and whether the ineffective-assistance claim could be addressed on direct appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Reames)	Held
Timeliness of appeal from Mar. 17 sentencing	The appeal of the Mar. 17 sentence is untimely; 30-day statute is jurisdictional	Reames argues counsel was ineffective for failing to file a timely appeal from Mar. 17	Appeal as to Mar. 17 is untimely and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Appealability of Mar. 20 amended probation order	The amended order did not affect a substantial right and Reames was not aggrieved, so it is not a final, appealable order	Reames treats the Mar. 20 order as the basis for a direct appeal and to press ineffective-assistance claim	Mar. 20 order is not a final, appealable order here (no substantial right affected; Reames consented), so appeal dismissed
Whether ineffective-assistance for failing to file timely appeal can be raised on direct appeal	If direct appeal of the criminal judgment is not timely, ineffective-assistance claim must be raised in postconviction proceedings	Reames contends that because appellate counsel differs from trial counsel, ineffective-assistance should be raised on direct appeal	Because Reames failed to timely appeal the judgment, her first available remedy is postconviction relief; appellate counsel was not required/authorized to raise it on the Mar. 20 appeal

State v. Paulsen, 304 Neb. 21 (2019) (framework for when postjudgment orders modifying probation may be "final" and affect a substantial right)
State v. Theisen, 306 Neb. 591 (2020) (appellate courts’ independent obligation to ensure jurisdiction)
State v. Flying Hawk, 227 Neb. 878 (1988) (30-day notice-of-appeal requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional)
State v. Devers, 306 Neb. 429 (2020) (when appellate counsel differs from trial counsel, trial-counsel ineffectiveness known from record must be raised on direct appeal)
State v. Bazer, 276 Neb. 7 (2008) (when same counsel represents at trial and on direct appeal, ineffective-assistance claims are usually reserved for postconviction relief)
Smith v. Lincoln Meadows Homeowners Assn., 267 Neb. 849 (2004) (a party is not aggrieved and cannot prosecute error when granted that which was sought)
Snyder v. Contemporary Obstetrics & Gyn., 258 Neb. 643 (2000) (appellate courts may address issues unnecessary to disposition when likely to recur)