Zeleny v. State, 298 Neb. 244

James R. Zeleny was charged in county court with DUI (breath-based allegation .08 and enhanced .15). A plea agreement was announced verbally modifying the charge to DUI .15; no written amended information was filed. Zeleny pled guilty to the verbally amended charge.
At the plea hearing the factual basis included officer observations, failed field sobriety and preliminary breath tests, and a hospital blood test registering .297 BAC.
Zeleny later moved in county court to arrest judgment, arguing the plea lacked a sufficient factual basis because the information alleged breath-based measurement while the established evidence showed a blood measurement.
The county court denied the motion to arrest judgment. Zeleny then filed a petition for a writ of prohibition in district court seeking to restrain the county court from sentencing him; the district court denied the writ.
Zeleny appealed the denial of the writ to the Nebraska Supreme Court (he also attempted to raise the county-court motion-to-arrest-judgment denial, but the Supreme Court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to review that county-court order in this appeal).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether district court erred denying writ of prohibition to prevent county court sentencing	Zeleny: plea lacked sufficient factual basis because charging instrument alleged breath-based offense but factual basis rested on blood test	State: county court had jurisdiction to sentence and other remedies (withdraw plea/appeal) were available; prohibition not warranted	Denied: extraordinary writ not justified; sentencing authority proper and alternative remedies exist
Whether appellate court may review county court's denial of motion to arrest judgment in this appeal	Zeleny: seeks review of county-court order denying arrest of judgment	State: only district-court final order (denial of prohibition) is properly before appellate court	Held: Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review county-court order in this appeal; not before the court

Conkling v. DeLany, 167 Neb. 4, 91 N.W.2d 250 (discusses extraordinary writs and scope of prohibition)
State of Nebraska ex rel. Line v. Kuhlman, 167 Neb. 674, 94 N.W.2d 373 (prohibition is preventative; mere procedural error not ground for prohibition)
Line v. Rouse, 241 Neb. 779, 491 N.W.2d 316 (standards for issuance of prohibition)
State v. Loyd, 269 Neb. 762, 696 N.W.2d 860 (appellate jurisdiction limited to final orders)
State ex rel. Wright v. Barney, 133 Neb. 676, 276 N.W. 676 (motion for writ of prohibition is an action)