S-21-0213, State of Nebraska (Appellee) v. Seidy N. Albarenga (Appellant)
Petition for Further Review from the Nebraska Court of Appeals on appeal thereto from the District Court for Lancaster County, Judge Andrew R. Jacobsen, on appeal thereto from the County Court for Lancaster County, Judge Joseph E. Dalton
Attorneys: Nathan Sohriakoff, (Lancaster Public Defender for Appellant) and Christine A. Loseke (Assistant City Prosecutor for the City of Lincoln, Appellee).
Criminal: Driving Under the Influence and Motion to Suppress
Proceedings Below: Both the County Court and the District Court for Lancaster County overruled Appellant’s motions to quash and motion to suppress evidence. After the Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed the decisions from the lower courts, Appellant petitioned the Nebraska Supreme Court for further review, which was sustained, and the Nebraska Supreme Court transferred this case to its docket.
Issues: On Petition for Further Review, Appellant makes the following assignments of error: 1) The Nebraska Court of Appeals erred by taking judicial notice of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Manual); 2) The Nebraska Court of Appeals erred by finding that the plain language of the Manual should be treated like a statute; 3) The Nebraska Court of Appeals erred by treating the manual as the “controlling law” when it found that the statutory language at Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,123 was “less specific” than the language of the manual; 4) The Nebraska Court of Appeals erred by finding that Lincoln Municipal Code § 10.12.030 is consistent with Nebraska law; and 5) The Nebraska Court of Appeals erred by finding that Appellant’s second and third assignments of error are without merit “because there is no conflict between § 10.12.030 and § 60-6,123”.