Nebraska court of appeals denies constitutional challenge to fetal homicide law because defendant failed to file the proper notice with the Clerk of the Supreme Court State v. Moss (Not Designated for Permanent Publication) Filed January 16, 2007. No. A-05-1132.Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J. Patrick Mullen, Judge. Affirmed Defendant convicted of second degree murder and fetal homicide challenged constitutionality of § 28-392 as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, both on its face and as applied to Moss. Court of appeals affirms conviction and finds Dfendant did not comply with Neb. Ct. R. of Prac. 9E (rev. 2006) Nebraska Supreme Court rules of practice, which requires the appellant to notify the clerk of the supreme court that he is challenging the constitutionality of a law: The record shows that on June 28, 2004, Moss filed a motion to quash the count of the information charging him with second degree murder of Harlan's unborn child. In support of Moss' motion, he alleged that § 28-392 was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, both on its face and as applied to him. In an order filed October 5, the district court denied Moss' motion to quash. Moss filed an appeal from that order, and this court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction under Neb. Ct. R. of Prac. 7A(2) (rev. 2001). See State v. Moss, 13 Neb. App. ___ (No. A-04-1192, Dec. 14, 2004). Moss properly presented the constitutional issue to the district court. However, the record does not show that Moss complied with rule 9E, which requires in part that when filing a brief, a party alleging unconstitutionality of a federal or state statute must file and serve a separate written notice of the challenge to the statute with the Clerk of the Supreme Court. Because Moss did not comply with this requirement, the constitutional challenge to § 28-392 has not been properly preserved for appellate review