State v. WilcoxState v. Wilcox
In this case, we are presented with a transcript, as supplemented upon our request, which shows that the defendant, Eric L. Wilcox, was sentenced by the county court for Scotts Bluff County for driving while under the influence of alcoholic liquor (DUI). He appealed the sentence to the district court, and the sentence was affirmed. He appeals the same issue to this court.
Before reaching the legal issues presented for review, it is the duty of an appellate court to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the matter before it.
State
v.
Johnson,
The transcript shows that the county court used one preprinted form to record its judgment of conviction and its sentence. By filling in blanks, the court recorded the events of the trial and its judgment of guilt on the top half of the form, under the date of April 7, 2000, and by filling in similar blanks on the bottom half of the form, it recorded the sentence imposed upon Wilcox. There is no file stamp on the document.
The notice of appeal bears a stamp stating “FILED” with the date “JUN 0 [sic] 2000,” appearing immediately below the word “FILED” and the words “SCOTTSBLUFF COUNTY JUDGE” immediately below the date. There is a separate order setting bond which is dated June 8, 2000, and bears a file stamp near the center of the page which appears to be the same stamp as used on the notice of appeal, but the stamped date thereupon is “JUN 06 2000.” Near the judge’s signature on this document, there appears the stamped seal of the Scotts Bluff County Court. The *935 transcript also contains the appropriate documents necessary to perfect an appeal to the district court. There is also a signed journal of the district court for Scotts Bluff County in which that court found that the sentence of the county court was proper and ordered it to be affirmed. This document bears a stamp stating “FILED Nov. 1 2000,” with a stamped signature of the clerk thereunder and the words “CLERK OF THE DIST COURT”, under that signature. The notice of appeal to this court bears a file stamp stating: “Oct 30 2000. Ann Rosenberry” with the words “CLERK OF THE DIST. COURT BY Santos Castro DEPUTY.”
The jurisdictional problem arises because the documents purporting to be the judgment of the county court have not been entered in accordance with the current version of
The entry of a judgment or final order occurs when the clerk of the court places the file stamp and date upon the judgment or final order. For purposes of determining the time for appeal, the date stamped on the judgment or final order shall be the date of entry.
Before that provision became effective on August 28, 1999,
The time of rendition of a judgment or making of a final order is the time at which the action of the judge in announcing the judgment or final order is noted on the trial docket or, if the action is not noted on the trial docket, the time at which the journal entry of the action is signed by the judge and filed.
*936
When that statute was modified in 1999, subsection (1) was modified to provide that the notice of appeal must be filed and the docket fee paid within 30 days after the “entry of the judgment.” At the same time, similar changes were made for the entry of final orders in the district courts. See
We would also like to encourage trial courts to obtain stamps which clearly show to the personnel of this court, or other interested persons, that the clerk has placed a file stamp and date upon the judgment or order in compliance with
We also observe that
A notice of appeal or docket fee filed or deposited after the announcement of a decision or final order but before the entry of the judgment or final order shall be treated as filed or deposited after the entry of the judgment or final order and on the day of entry.
This provision is obviously intended to allow clerks to correct any oversight in file stamping final orders by doing so when the absence is called to the clerk’s attention and to recertify the order in an amended transcript to show the file stamp.
Because the district court did not have jurisdiction to decide Wilcox’s appeal, this court likewise does not have jurisdiction, and we dismiss this appeal. We nonetheless have the jurisdiction to require the district court to vacate its order and to dismiss the appeal from the county court. See
State
v.
McNerny, 239
Neb. 887,
Appeal dismissed, and cause REMANDED WITH DIRECTION.