State v. Martin
| Decision Date | 01 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | A-21-502 |
| Parties | State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Rezzaire E. Martin, appellant. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Nebraska |
Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: Jodi L. Nelson Judge.
Joseph Nigro, Lancaster County Public Defender, and Chelsie Krell for appellant.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Matthew Lewis for appellee.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
Following his plea of no contest, Rezzaire E. Martin was convicted of aggravated first degree sexual assault. He was sentenced to 40 to 50 years' imprisonment. Martin argues that there was insufficient evidence for his conviction, his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, and the sentence imposed was excessive. We affirm.
At the time of Martin's arrest, he was using the alias Travon E. Sandee. On January 31, 2020, the State filed a complaint in the county court for Lancaster County, charging Sandee with first degree sexual assault, a Class II felony, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-319(1)(c) (Reissue 2016). Sandee's date of birth was listed as June 14, 1997.
On April 7, 2020, the State filed an amended complaint, correcting the defendant's name to Rezzaire E. Martin. The amended information listed aliases for Martin, including "Travon E. Sandee," and Martin's date of birth was listed as both December 9, 1990, and June 14, 1997.
The case was subsequently bound over to the district court and on July 10, 2020, the State filed an information identical to the amended complaint filed on April 7 in county court, including Martin's aliases and two listed birthdates. On January 28, 2021, the State filed a motion to amend the information. At a hearing on February 24, the State moved to amend the information to charge Martin with first degree sexual assault of a child, a Class IB felony, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-319.01(3) (Reissue 2016). The court granted the State's motion to amend over Martin's objection, and the following day the State filed an amended information.
At the start of the preliminary hearing on February 26, 2021, the district court asked Martin what name he went by, and Martin answered, "Rezzaire Martin." The court clarified, "Mr. Martin, also known as Travon Sandee, is that right?" Martin answered, "Yes." An officer with the Lincoln Police Department then testified that when law enforcement arrested Martin, Martin was using the alias Travon Sandee. However, upon further investigation and fingerprint analysis, the officer was later able to identify the individual in custody as Martin.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, the State filed a second amended information in the district court on April 2, 2021, charging Martin with first degree sexual assault, a Class II felony, in violation of § 28-319(1)(a)(c). The information further alleged that the offense constituted a registerable offense which classified it as an aggravated offense pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4001.01(1) (Reissue 2016). At a hearing on April 2, Martin pled no contest to the single count in the amended information. The following factual basis was provided by the State:
[T]he State believes if this matter would go to trial the evidence would show that the victim, [N.S.], met a man over Snapchat in . . . July of 2019. That man identified himself as Johnny Sandy to [N.S.].
On July 9th of 2019 [N.S.] and Johnny Sandy as she knew him, . . . met in person.
On that day the man she knew as Johnny picked her up from her house in a white BMW and took her to a different house in Lincoln.
And [N.S.] would testify that while at that house her and Johnny Sandy engaged in sexual intercourse and his penis penetrated her vagina. Afterwards, Mr. Sandy took [N.S.] back to her father's house.
At the end of July of 2019 it was discovered by [N.S.'] guardian that she had met up with a strange man and made a report to the Lincoln Police Department. After interviewing [N.S.], [N.S.] was taken on a drive with her guardian and she was able to show them the house where Johnny had taken her in order to have sex.
Police searched the records for that house and discovered that it was an Air BnB rental and made contact with the owner of the Air BnB rental from whom they discovered that the person who had rented her house on July 19th, 2019, had gone by the name Trayvon Sandy.
A search of records showed that Trayvon Sandy did have a white BMW registered in his name. Some months later an officer with the Lincoln Police Department located the license plates that belonged to that BMW at a hotel in Lincoln.
Within that car were also paperwork that belonged to a Trayvon Sandy. Police entered the hotel and made contact with [Martin] and took him in for an interview. During that interview [Martin] gave his phone number . . .
This is the phone number that was given to [N.S.] by the person she knew as . . . Johnny when she had contact with him over Snapchat. Further, a search warrant to that phone number was conducted . . . to Sprint, and found records of [N.S.'] phone number . . . within his telephone records showing that their phones had had contact with each other.
[Martin] was arrested. After [Martin] was arrested, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children made contact with the Lincoln Police Department indicating they believed the person who was in custody was actually Rezzaire Martin.
Fingerprints were compared between [Martin] and the known prints for Rezzaire Martin and Trayvon Sandy and it . . . was discovered that the person in custody was, in fact, Rezzaire Martin whose date of birth is December 9th of 1990.
[N.S.'] date of birth is April . . . 2005. During a deposition of [N.S.], she was shown a photograph of Rezzaire Martin and she, without hesitation, said that that was the man who had picked her up and had sexual intercourse with her on July 9th of 2019.
All of those events occurred in Lancaster County, Nebraska.
The district court accepted Martin's no contest plea and found him guilty of first degree sexual assault. The court also ordered a presentence investigation.
At a hearing held on May 20, 2021, the district court sentenced Martin to 40 to 50 years' imprisonment with credit for 420 days already served.
Martin appeals.
Martin assigns, restated, that (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction of first degree sexual assault, (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and (3) the district court imposed an excessive sentence.
A trial court is afforded discretion in deciding whether to accept guilty pleas, and an appellate court will reverse the trial court's determination only in case of an abuse of discretion. State v. Theisen, 306 Neb. 591, 946 N.W.2d 677 (2020). A judicial abuse of discretion exists only when the reasons or rulings of a trial judge are clearly untenable, unfairly depriving a litigant of a substantial right and denying a just result in matters submitted for disposition. State v. Morton, 310 Neb. 355, 966 N.W.2d 57 (2021).
Whether a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel may be determined on direct appeal is a question of law. State v. Blaha, 303 Neb. 415, 929 N.W.2d 494 (2019). In reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, an appellate court decides only whether the undisputed facts contained within the record are sufficient to conclusively determine whether counsel did or did not provide effective assistance and whether the defendant was or was not prejudiced by counsel's alleged deficient performance. Id.
An appellate court will not disturb a sentence imposed within the statutory limits absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court. State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289, 940 N.W.2d 529 (2020).
In his first assignment of error, Martin asserts that the district court erred in accepting his no contest plea because it was not supported by sufficient evidence.
The voluntary entry of a guilty plea or a plea of no contest waives every defense to a charge, whether the defense is procedural, statutory, or constitutional. State v. Manjikian, 303 Neb. 100, 927 N.W.2d 48 (2019). Thus, when a defendant pleads guilty or no contest, he or she is limited to challenging whether the plea was understandingly and voluntarily made and whether it was the result of ineffective assistance of counsel. State v. Blaha, supra. A sufficient factual basis is a requirement for finding that a plea was entered into understandingly and voluntarily. State v. Jenkins, 303 Neb. 676, 931 N.W.2d 851 (2019). Accordingly, Martin has not waived his challenge to the factual basis. See State v. Wilkinson, 293 Neb. 876, 881 N.W.2d 850 (2016) ().
Martin was convicted of first degree sexual assault. Section 28-319 provides, in relevant part:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial