Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 09-06-2024
Case Style:
State of Nebraska v. Judy K. Jones
Case Number: S-23-402
Judge: James G. Kube
Court: District Court, Madison County, Nebraska
Plaintiff's Attorney: Madison County Nebraska District Attorney's Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
Norfolk, Nebraska practicing a profession or occupation without a credential criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant.
In two separate criminal cases, the State charged a selfdescribed "lay midwife" with violating the Uniform Credentialing Act (UCA)[1] by practicing a profession or occupation without a credential after having been ordered to cease and desist. The midwife filed a plea in abatement in each case challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to show that she had committed the charged crime. In each case, the district court sustained the plea in abatement primarily because it found that "nurse midwives" were not required to hold credentials under the UCA to practice in Nebraska. The district court also suggested in each case that the UCA would be unconstitutionally vague if it was construed to require a credential to practice "nurse midwifery.
Judy K. Jones variously describes herself as a "lay midwife," a "direct entry midwife," and a "midwife, pure and simple."[4]Jones also claims to be a "Certified Professional Midwife," which, according to Jones, involves certification by the North American Registry of Midwives. Jones acknowledges that she does not hold a credential issued by the State of Nebraska under the UCA to practice medicine and surgery, advanced practice registered nursing, or certified nurse midwifery.
* * *
Ultimately, we agree with the State that, in Nebraska, individuals who engage in the conduct in which Jones allegedly engaged are generally required to hold a credential under the UCA. That conclusion is based on our familiar principles of statutory interpretation.
Outcome: Reversed and remanded.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: