has held that a sentence is not a final judgment until the entry of the final mandate of an appellate court. See, State v. Warner, 192 Neb. 438, 222 N.W.2d 292 (1974); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2301 (Cum. Supp. 1992) (providing that “the execution of the sentence or judgment shall be suspended until such time as the appeal has been determined”). See, also, State v. Schall, 234 Neb. 101, 449 N.W.2d 225 (1989) (stating that a defendant has no expectation of finality in his sentence until the appeal is concluded or the time to appeal has expired). Therefore, the determination of parole eligibility and tentative release dates for the sentence imposed is dependent upon the entry of a final judgment, or sentence, against the defendant. See Moscone v. Manson, 185 Conn. 124, 440 A.2d 848 (1981) (<HOLDING>). The law in effect when both of these
holding that where the law is unsettled at the time of trial but settled by the time of appeal the plainness of the error should be judged by the law at the time of appeal holding that clearly established federal law as determined by the supreme court under aedpa is the law at the time of the statecourt adjudication on the merits not at the time the conviction becomes final holding that statutory good time credits must be calculated under the law in effect at the time of resentencing after an appeal of the sentence is determined holding that a defendants sentence is controlled by the law in effect at the time he committed the offense holding state of the law must be determined at time of challenged action