How Much for That Doggie in the Jail Cell?

In State v. Lesoing-Dittoe, 693 N.W.2d 261 (Neb. 2005), the Nebraska Supreme Court granted Murphy the Dog a reprieve from the executioner, holding that the trial judge had abused his discretion in affirming the state’s recommendation that Murphy be put down.

Murphy, a female malamute-shepherd mix had escaped from his owners’ yard and attacked neighboring dogs four times in 1997. The owners paid $20,000 for a sixfeet high iron rail fence to enclose him. On March 17, 2001, one of Murphy’s owners forgot to close the gate of this extraordinary doggie fence, and Murphy escaped and immediately proceeded to attack another dog.

The sheriff’s office, pursuant to Neb. Rev Stat. § 54- 617(6), declared Murphy a dangerous doggie.* A criminal complaint was filed against Murphy’s owners for allowing her to run at large and to attack the neighbor’s dog. The state filed a “motion for disposition” of Murphy pursuant to N eb. Rev. Stat. § 54-611, recommending that Murphy be destroyed.

At Murphy’s sentencing hearing, her veterinarian testified that Murphy was a nice doggie. The owners testified as to their expenditure of thousands of more dollars to contain Murphy, lest he terrorize the neighborhood dogs again. The county sheriff also testified that Murphy was a nice doggie, as did six other human friends of Murphy.

The trial judge, apparently a cat person, held that Murphy was a “stalk[er],” and there was no guarantee that Murphy would not get past the owner’s man-made contrivances and further endanger other animals.

On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court likened the “disposition order” to a sentence and stated that under the proper standard of review, Murphy’s sentence would stand unless the judge abused his discretion. The court reiterated the reams of testimony calling Murphy a good doggie and noted the owner’s Murphy-confinement expenses. Under the circumstances, the court held that the recommended destruction of Murphy was not reasonable.