Proposal would let police issue brief orders after assault arrests

Police officers could issue brief protection orders after domestic or sexual assault arrests. Orders would protect assault victims and their family or household members. Covered pets would go into the sole possession of the victim or a family or household member. The officer must have reasonable grounds to believe the arrested person threatens the victim or the victim's family or household members. Orders would bar threats, contact, home entry regardless of ownership, and firearm possession or purchases. They would also require staying away from places the officer names and protect covered household pets. A judge would review each order. The arrested person could request a change or cancellation, with priority for that hearing. The court could hear the request without other parties present if justice requires. Cancellation would require clear and convincing evidence, a strong level of proof, that no covered assault occurred or no covered threat exists. Changes would require the same level of proof that they would not increase harm, and must serve justice. Unless canceled sooner, an order would expire at 11:59 p.m. on the third day after issuance. If courts are not in session that day, it would last until 11:59 p.m. on the next day they are. Court review would not extend it.

Police would enforce immediate orders, and courts would apply penalties for knowing violations. These rules would cover people who violate immediate protection orders. The related stalking and weapons rules would apply only when their stated conditions are met. Police would have to arrest someone, with or without a warrant, when they have probable cause to believe an order was violated and receive a copy or confirm with police that it remains in effect. A first knowing violation would be a Class I misdemeanor. A second or later violation would be a Class IV felony, a more serious crime. Courts could not defer entry of a conviction for these violations. Stalking while violating an immediate order would qualify as a Class IIIA felony. Carrying a firearm or destructive device during a misdemeanor order violation would also fall under the separate weapons offense. Possessing a firearm, a knife, or brass or iron knuckles while knowingly violating a current, valid immediate order would fall under the felony rules for weapon possession by a prohibited person. The order must remain in effect for the required arrest rule. The prohibited-person weapons rule would require a current, valid order.

Courts would treat attendance at a covered hearing as notice of a final protection order entered there. The rule would apply when prosecuting a protection-order violation under section 26-118. The person subject to the order must attend a hearing under section 26-108 or 26-109. The court must enter a final protection order at that hearing.

Government agencies would restrict disclosure of license-plate tracking data when presented with a qualifying immediate order. The restriction would cover captured license-plate data held by a government agency for vehicles meeting these ownership conditions. The agency must receive an immediate protection order protecting the driver. The vehicle must be registered jointly with the restrained person or solely in that person's name. Disclosure would still be allowed through a disclosure order or a match permitted by the cited license-plate data laws.

Police training and information given to sexual assault victims would cover immediate protection orders. The information duty would apply to health care providers and police officers, and also to Nebraska's Department of Health and Human Services for victims younger than 18. Law enforcement agencies' domestic abuse training would cover the Immediate Protection from Abuse Act. Information given to sexual assault victims would include immediate orders and how to obtain protection. Victim information would be provided at the first interaction relating to the sexual assault.