State v. Jones

Decision Date13 March 1998
Docket NumberNo. S-96-889,S-96-889
PartiesSTATE of Nebraska, Appellee, v. Everett D. JONES, appellant.
CourtNebraska Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

1. Postconviction: Proof: Appeal and Error. A criminal defendant requesting postconviction relief has the burden of establishing a basis for such relief, and the findings of the district court will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous.

2. Postconviction: Proof. An evidentiary hearing on a motion for postconviction relief is required on an appropriate motion containing factual allegations which, if proved, constitute an infringement of the movant's rights under the Nebraska or federal Constitution.

3. Postconviction. A court is not required to grant an evidentiary hearing on a motion for postconviction relief which alleges only conclusions of law or fact; nor is an evidentiary hearing required under the Nebraska Postconviction Act when (1) the motion for postconviction relief does not contain sufficient factual allegations concerning a denial or violation of constitutional rights affecting the judgment against the movant, or (2) notwithstanding proper pleadings of facts in a motion for postconviction relief, the files and records in the movant's case do not show a denial or violation of the movant's constitutional rights causing the judgment against the movant to be void or voidable.

4. Postconviction: Appeal and Error. From a procedural standpoint, a motion for postconviction relief cannot be used to secure review of issues which were or could have been litigated on direct appeal.

5. Effectiveness of Counsel: Proof. To sustain a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as a violation of the Sixth Amendment 6. Indictments and Informations: Oaths and Affirmations. To meet the requirement that an information shall be verified by the oath of the county attorney, it is sufficient if it appears, no matter in what form, that the truth of the charge or charges contained in the information are confirmed and substantiated by the oath of the county attorney.

to the U.S. Constitution and article I, § 11, of the Nebraska Constitution and thereby obtain reversal of a defendant's conviction, the defendant must show that (1) counsel's performance was deficient and (2) such deficient performance prejudiced the defendant, that is, demonstrate a reasonable probability that but for counsel's deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.

7. Effectiveness of Counsel: Proof. The standard for determining the propriety of a defendant's claim that his counsel's performance was deficient is whether the attorney, in representing the accused, performed at least as well as a lawyer with ordinary training and skill in the criminal law area.

8. Trial: Effectiveness of Counsel: Presumptions. In determining whether a trial counsel's performance was deficient, there is a strong presumption that such counsel acted reasonably.

9. Postconviction. The Nebraska Postconviction Act requires that a prisoner seeking relief under the act must be in actual custody in Nebraska under a Nebraska sentence.

10. Sentences: Evidence. A trial court has broad discretion as to the source and type of evidence and information it may use in determining the kind and extent of punishment to be imposed.

Mark E. Ford, Lincoln, for appellant.

Don Stenberg, Attorney General, and Kimberly A. Klein, Lincoln, for appellee.

WHITE, C.J., and CAPORALE, WRIGHT, CONNOLLY, GERRARD, STEPHAN, and McCORMACK, JJ.

WRIGHT, Justice.

NATURE OF CASE

Everett D. Jones appeals from the district court's dismissal without an evidentiary hearing of his petition for postconviction relief. We affirm.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

A criminal defendant requesting postconviction relief has the burden of establishing a basis for such relief, and the findings of the district court will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous. State v. Boppre, 252 Neb. 935, 567 N.W.2d 149 (1997).

FACTS

Following a plea of nolo contendere, Jones was convicted of assault in the first degree for the multiple stabbing of a male victim after Jones found the victim with a woman with whom Jones believed he was romantically involved. Jones was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of not less than 62/3 nor more than 20 years. Jones appealed to the Nebraska Court of Appeals, which summarily affirmed. See State v. Jones, 1 Neb.App. xxx (case No. A-92-139, July 6, 1992). The sole issue before the Court of Appeals was the excessiveness of Jones' sentence.

On January 2, 1996, Jones filed a petition for postconviction relief. The district court dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing, concluding that Jones had failed to allege facts which, if proved, established a denial or violation of his constitutional rights that would cause the judgment against him to be void or voidable. Jones timely appealed from the district court's dismissal of his petition for postconviction relief.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Jones assigns as error the district court's denial of an evidentiary hearing and the dismissal of his petition for postconviction relief.

ANALYSIS

An evidentiary hearing on a motion for postconviction relief is required on an appropriate motion containing factual allegations which, if proved, constitute an infringement Jones asserts that the district court erred in failing to grant him an evidentiary hearing at which he might show that his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel has been violated. To sustain a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as a violation of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article I, § 11, of the Nebraska Constitution and thereby obtain reversal of a defendant's conviction, the defendant must show that (1) counsel's performance was deficient and (2) such deficient performance prejudiced the defendant, that is, demonstrate a reasonable probability that but for counsel's deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different. State v. Boppre, supra.

                of the movant's rights under the Nebraska or federal Constitution.  State v. Boppre, supra.   However, a court is not required to grant an evidentiary hearing on a motion for postconviction relief which alleges only conclusions of law or fact;  nor is an evidentiary hearing required under the Nebraska Postconviction Act when (1) the motion for postconviction relief does not contain sufficient factual allegations concerning a denial or violation of constitutional rights affecting the judgment against the movant, [254 Neb. 215] or (2) notwithstanding proper pleadings of facts in a motion for postconviction relief, the files and records in the movant's case do not show a denial or violation of the movant's constitutional rights causing the judgment against the movant to be void or voidable.  Id. From a procedural standpoint, a motion for postconviction relief cannot be used to secure review of issues which were or could have been litigated on direct appeal.  State v. Russell, 248 Neb. 723, 539 N.W.2d 8 (1995);  State v. Ryan, 248 Neb. 405, 534 N.W.2d 766 (1995)
                

Jones first claims that his right to effective assistance of counsel was violated because trial counsel failed to file a motion to dismiss the allegedly unverified information. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1603 (Reissue 1995) provides: "All informations shall be verified by the oath of the county attorney, complainant, or some other person...."

The information in the case at bar provided as follows:

DAVID W. STEMPSON, Deputy Lancaster County Attorney by authority of the State of Nebraska, comes here in person into Court at this, the July Term, A.D.1991-92, thereof, and for the State of Nebraska gives the Court to understand and be informed that EVERETT D. JONES on or about June 2, 1991, in the County of Lancaster, and the State, aforesaid, contrary to the form of the statutes in such cases made and provided then and there being, did intentionally or knowingly cause serious bodily injury to MYLES DAVIS.

THE STATE OF NEBRASKA, Plaintiff

GARY E. LACEY

LANCASTER COUNTY ATTORNEY

/s/

DAVID W. STEMPSON

DEPUTY LANCASTER COUNTY ATTORNEY

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 12th day of July, 1991.

/s/

DEPUTY CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURT

Jones appears to argue that the information was deficient because it did not contain the language approved by this court in Nichols v. State, 109 Neb. 335, 191 N.W. 333 (1922). In Nichols, the information approved of stated in part: " 'Allen E. Warren, being duly sworn according to law, says the facts stated in his foregoing information are true as he verily believes.' " 109 Neb. at 343, 191 N.W. at 335.

We addressed this issue in Marshall v. State, 116 Neb. 45, 215 N.W. 564 (1927). Before arraignment, Marshall's attorney moved to quash the information because, inter alia, it was not verified as required by law, and the motion was overruled. The information was in the form of an affidavit. Immediately following the title of the case and preceding the information appeared the following: " 'State of Nebraska, County of Sarpy, ss.' " Id. at 47, 215 N.W. at 566. In the body of the information, forgery was charged in direct and positive terms. The county attorney's signature appeared at the end of the information along with the following: " 'Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of October, 1926, Eliza M. Wilson, Clerk of the District court, by C.S. Marth, Deputy.' " Id. at 48, 215 N.W. at 566. To this was attached the seal of the district court.

Marshall argued that because no formal verification in the form of a statement or certificate was appended to the information stating that the facts therein contained were true, or true as the county attorney verily believed, the information was not verified by oath of the county attorney as required by law. Comp. Stat. § 10088 (1922), which was in effect at the time, required that an information " 'shall be verified by the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • State v. Moore, S-97-511
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • April 2, 1999
    ...223 Neb. 150, 388 N.W.2d 483 (1986), cert. denied 481 U.S. 1042, 107 S.Ct. 1987, 95 L.Ed.2d 826 (1987). See, also, State v. Jones, 254 Neb. 212, 575 N.W.2d 156 (1998), disapproved on other grounds, State v. Silvers, supra; State v. Fletcher, 253 Neb. 1029, 573 N.W.2d 752 Moore's first three......
  • State v. Silvers, S-98-126
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Nebraska
    • December 4, 1998
    ...show that the defendant is entitled to no relief. 6. Postconviction: Case Disapproved. To the extent that State v. Jones, 254 Neb. 212, 575 N.W.2d 156 (1998), and State v. Boppre, 252 Neb. 935, 567 N.W.2d 149 (1997), suggest that an evidentiary hearing on an adequately pled motion for postc......
  • State v. Malcom, A-02-621.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Nebraska
    • March 9, 2004
    ...relief cannot be used to secure review of issues which were or could have been litigated on direct appeal, quoting State v. Jones, 254 Neb. 212, 575 N.W.2d 156 (1998), disapproved on other grounds, State v. Silvers, 255 Neb. 702, 587 N.W.2d 325 (1998). Thus, the district court said, it may ......
  • State v. Alford, A–15–527
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Nebraska
    • July 26, 2016
    ...in the information before the district court were waived when Alford entered pleas of not guilty to the charges. See State v. Jones, 254 Neb. 212, 575 N.W.2d 156 (1998) (objections to verification are waived if not made before arraignment and plea), disapproved on other grounds, 24 Neb.App.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT