In re Interest of Candice H.

IN RE INTEREST OF CANDICE H. 	935
Cite as 284 Neb. 935
We reject Qualls’ contentions that his waiver was not know-
ing. As noted above, this court has previously held, with
respect to constitutional rights, that “a formalistic litany is not
required” to establish waiver, but instead that waiver is shown
under the totality of the circumstances. And we decline to
require a more “formalistic litany” for the waiver of a statutory
right than for the waiver of a constitutional one.
A review of the totality of these circumstances shows that
Qualls was informed of his right to a presentence investiga-
tion, was informed as to what information the judge would be
considering, was provided the opportunity to present any addi-
tional information to the court, was questioned as to whether
he had been threatened or promised anything for his decision
to waive this right, and was expressly asked if his waiver was
made freely and voluntarily. The district court did not clearly
err in finding that Qualls’ waiver was made “voluntarily, know-
ingly, and intelligently.”
CONCLUSION
The decision of the district court is affirmed.
A ffirmed.
in re interest of CAndiCe H., A CHild
under 18 yeArs of Age.
stAte of nebrAskA, AppellAnt, v.
CAndiCe H., Appellee.
824 N.W.2d 34
Filed December 21, 2012. 	No. S-12-424.
1. Juvenile Courts: Appeal and Error. An appellate court reviews juvenile cases
de novo on the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the juvenile
court’s findings.
2. ____: ____. In reviewing questions of law arising under the Nebraska Juvenile
Code, an appellate court reaches conclusions independent of the lower court’s
rulings.
3. Juvenile Courts: Probation and Parole: Sentences: Records. Satisfactory
completion of a juvenile’s probation, supervision, or other treatment or reha-
bilitation program provided under the Nebraska Juvenile Code or satisfactory
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
11/01/2026 04:41 AM CST

936 	284 NEBRASKA REPORTS
completion of a juvenile’s diversion or sentence in county court is a condition
precedent to sealing a record pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2,108.03(5) (Cum.
Supp. 2012).
Appeal from the Separate Juvenile Court of Douglas County:
WAdie tHomAs, Judge. Order vacated.
Donald W. Kleine, Douglas County Attorney, and Sarah M.
Moore for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
H eAviCAn, C.J., WrigHt, C onnolly, stepHAn, mCC ormACk,
miller-lermAn, and CAssel, JJ.
stepHAn, J.
The State appeals from an order of the separate juvenile
court of Douglas County ordering that the record in this juve-
nile proceeding be sealed. The State contends that the statutory
requirements for sealing the record were not met. We agree and
therefore vacate the order.
BACKGROUND
On May 20, 2011, an amended petition was filed in the
juvenile court for Douglas County alleging that Candice H.
was a child within Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(1) (Reissue 2008)
because she had possessed 1 ounce or less of marijuana and
drug paraphernalia. Candice admitted the allegations, and after
a disposition hearing on August 18, the juvenile court found
that it was in Candice’s best interests to be placed under the
supervision of a probation officer. The court ordered that
Candice be placed on probation “for an open-ended period
of time and at that time [her] records will be sealed if [she]
has successfully completed probation unless sooner extended
or revoked for cause by the Court, or unless a capias has been
issued herein during the term of this probation.”
At a December 19, 2011, disposition hearing, the juve-
nile court entered an order requiring that Candice remain on
“probation contract” and under the supervision of a probation
officer. Candice was also ordered to enroll in an outpatient
substance abuse program and to follow any and all aftercare

IN RE INTEREST OF CANDICE H. 	937
Cite as 284 Neb. 935
recommendations. Finally, the court ordered that the matter
“shall be scheduled for an internal check for the purpose of
the Court entering an order terminating jurisdiction when
said child reaches the age of majority.”
On May 1, 2012, the juvenile court entered an order find-
ing that its jurisdiction should be terminated because Candice
had reached the age of majority. On the same date, the court
entered a separate order on its own motion which stated:
No objections having been received, all records relating
to the arrest, adjudication and disposition of this matter
are ordered sealed. Information or other data concerning
any proceedings relating to the arrest, taking into custody,
petition, complaint, indictment, information, trial, hear-
ing, adjudication, correctional supervision, dismissal or
disposition are deemed never to have occurred.
The order stated that the sealed record was still accessible to
certain parties and could be inspected under certain conditions.
The Douglas County Attorney perfected a timely appeal from
the order pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2,106.01 (Cum.
Supp. 2012).
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
The State asserts that the juvenile court erred in ordering
that the record be sealed without giving prior notice to the
county attorney and without determining that Candice had sat-
isfactorily completed her probation.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
[1] An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on the
record and reaches its conclusions independently of the juve-
nile court’s findings.1
[2] In reviewing questions of law arising under the Nebraska
Juvenile Code, an appellate court reaches conclusions indepen-
dent of the lower court’s rulings.2
1 In re Interest of Elizabeth S., 282 Neb. 1015, 809 N.W.2d 495 (2012);
In re Interest of Lakota Z. & Jacob H., 282 Neb. 584, 804 N.W.2d 174
(2011).
2 In re Interest of Charlicia H., 283 Neb. 362, 809 N.W.2d 274 (2012).

938 	284 NEBRASKA REPORTS
ANALYSIS
The procedures for sealing records of juvenile cases are set
forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 43-2,108.01 to 43-2,108.05 (Cum.
Supp. 2012), enacted by the Nebraska Legislature in 20103 and
amended in 2011.4 These statutes apply here because Candice
was under the age of 18 when the alleged offenses occurred
and a juvenile petition was filed against her.5 The effect of
having a record sealed under these statutes is that “the person
whose record was sealed can respond to any public inquiry
as if the offense resulting in the record never occurred.”6
However, a sealed record is accessible to law enforcement
officials, prosecutors, and judges under certain circumstances.7
It is also accessible to any attorney representing the subject of
the sealed record.8 In addition, sealed records may be inspected
by other persons for certain limited purposes specified in
the statute.9
On the date of the order which is the subject of this appeal,
§ 43-2,108.03 provided the following procedures whereby a
court could initiate proceedings to seal a juvenile’s record on
its own motion:
(5) If a juvenile described in section 43-2,108.01 has
satisfactorily completed such juvenile’s probation, super-
vision, or other treatment or rehabilitation program pro-
vided under the Nebraska Juvenile Code or has satisfac-
torily completed such juvenile’s diversion or sentence in
county court:
(a) The court may initiate proceedings pursuant to
section 43-2,108.04 to seal the record pertaining to such
disposition or adjudication under the juvenile code or sen-
tence of the county court; and
3 2010 Neb. Laws, L.B. 800.
4 2011 Neb. Laws, L.B. 463.
5 See § 43-2,108.01.
6 § 43-2,108.05(2).
7 See § 43-2,108.05(3).
8 Id.
9 Id.

IN RE INTEREST OF CANDICE H. 	939
Cite as 284 Neb. 935
(b) If the juvenile has attained the age of seventeen
years, the court shall initiate proceedings pursuant to
section 43-2,108.04 to seal the record pertaining to such
disposition or adjudication under the juvenile code or
diversion or sentence of the county court, except that
the court is not required to initiate proceedings to seal
a record pertaining to a misdemeanor or infraction not
described in subdivision (4) of section 43-2,108.01 under
a city or village ordinance that has no possible jail sen-
tence. Such a record may be sealed under subsection (6)
of this section.
[3] Although subsection (5)(a) describes the circumstance
in which a court may initiate such proceedings and subsection
(5)(b) specifies when it must do so, both are subject to the con-
dition precedent of satisfactory completion of the “juvenile’s
probation, supervision, or other treatment or rehabilitation pro-
gram” in proceedings such as this which are governed by the
Nebraska Juvenile Code.10 This requirement is reflected in the
juvenile court’s order of August 19, 2011, in which it placed
Candice on probation and indicated that her records would
be sealed “if the child has successfully completed probation.”
But the court’s subsequent orders terminating jurisdiction and
sealing the record do not reflect that Candice had satisfactorily
completed her probation by the time she reached the age of
majority, and we find nothing in the record indicating that she
had done so. Nor do we find any principled basis for conclud-
ing that a juvenile satisfactorily completes probation merely by
reaching the age of majority.
When proceedings to seal juvenile court records are initi-
ated, the applicable statutes require the court to “promptly
notify the county attorney or city attorney involved in the
case,” who may then “file a response with the court within
thirty days after receiving such notice.”11 If no objections are
filed, the court may either order the records sealed or conduct
a hearing.12 But if objections are filed, the court must conduct
10 § 43-2,108.03(5).
11 § 43-2,108.04(1) and (2).
12 § 43-2,108.04(3).

940 	284 NEBRASKA REPORTS
a hearing and may order the record sealed if it makes find-
ings that the juvenile has been “rehabilitated to a satisfactory
degree.”13 In this case, the juvenile court’s order requiring the
record to be sealed recites that no objections were received, but
there is no indication in the order or elsewhere in the record
that the county attorney was ever given the required notice of
the proceeding to seal the record.
Accordingly, we conclude that the juvenile court erred in
ordering that the record be sealed, because (1) the order did not
include a finding that the juvenile had satisfactorily completed
her probation and (2) the county attorney was not given the
required notice of the proceeding to seal the record. We there-
fore vacate the order sealing Candice’s juvenile record.
order vACAted.
13 § 43-2,108.04(4) and (5).
stAte of nebrAskA ex rel. C ounsel for disCipline
of tHe nebrAskA supreme C ourt, relAtor,
v. Joel W. pHillips, respondent.
824 N.W.2d 376
Filed December 21, 2012. 	No. S-12-481.
Original action. Judgment of public reprimand.
H eAviCAn, C.J., WrigHt, C onnolly, stepHAn, mCC ormACk,
miller-lermAn, and CAssel, JJ.
per C uriAm.
INTRODUCTION
Respondent, Joel W. Phillips, was admitted to the practice
of law in the State of Nebraska on September 28, 1995. At
all relevant times, he was engaged in the private practice of
law in Wallace, Nebraska. On May 31, 2012, the Counsel for
Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court filed formal charges
consisting of one count against respondent. In the one count,
it was alleged that by his conduct, respondent had violated his