S-24-0981 State of Nebraska (Appellee) v. Brittany Two Two (Appellant)
Appeal from the District Court for Sheridan County, Judge Travis P. O’Gorman
Attorneys: Jerrod Jaeger (Jaeger Law Office PC LLO for Appellant), Nathan A. Liss (Asst. Attorney General for Appellee), and Christopher Eickholt (Eickholt Law LLC on behalf of Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association as amicus curiae).
Criminal: Postconviction relief and ineffective assistance of counsel
Proceedings below: Appellant was convicted of two counts of child abuse and one count of false reporting for which she was given an aggregate sentence of thirty-four (34) to forty-four (44) years in prison. Appellant’s appeal was dismissed when her legal counsel failed to file a brief. Appellant later sought postconviction relief, which the district court granted in the form of a new appeal. The State petitioned to bypass the Nebraska Court of Appeals, which the Nebraska Supreme Court granted and ordered that this case to be transferred to its docket.
Issues: Appellant assigns the following errors: 1) Appellant counsel’s ability to make “specific allegations of trial counsel’s deficient performance” has been obstructed by the trial court and appellate court’s denial of motions for discovery; and 2) Appellant was denied a fair trial and right to counsel due to the ineffective assistance of counsel in the following particulars: a) Trial counsel failed to interview, locate, and call State and defense witnesses; b) Trial counsel failed to file notice of witnesses that might be called on behalf of Appellant, resulting in the exclusion of witnesses; c) Trial counsel failed to advise defense witnesses of the sequestration order, to which he stipulated, resulting in the exclusion of witnesses; d) Trial counsel failed to make an offer of proof of the testimony that would have been provided by the excluded witnesses; e) Trial counsel failed to object to the testimony of Sarah Belt, who was called by the State, in spite of her not being disclosed to the defense or endorsed on the information; f) Trial counsel failed to investigate, object, and prosecute a motion to suppress/motion in limine related to the cell phone data collected by law enforcement; and g) Trial counsel failed to object to improper statements by State’s counsel in closing and at sentencing.
On cross-appeal, the State assigns the following error: 1) The district court erred by concluding that Appellant’s postconviction motion was timely under § 29-3001(4)(b), and relatedly, by granting postconviction relief in the form of a new direct appeal.