Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed whether a defendant convicted of third-degree assault via a no-contest plea must register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act when the plea hearing's factual basis omitted references to sexual contact, but the presentence investigation report contained allegations of such conduct. The court held that the governing statute requires trial courts to consider both the factual basis and the PSR collectively rather than separately, and found sufficient evidence in the record to support the registration order. Additionally, the court rejected challenges regarding the absence of explicit credibility findings, alleged procedural due process violations, and an advisory notice regarding federal firearm restrictions, ultimately affirming the lower courts' judgments.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the county court could order SORA registration when the factual basis at the plea hearing did not mention sexual penetration or sexual contact.
- Whether the trial court must make an express credibility finding regarding the victim’s statements before ordering registration.
- Whether the county court’s registration order violated procedural due process.
- Whether the county court’s advisement that the defendant might be prohibited from possessing firearms created a firearms prohibition.
Holdings
- The statutory phrase “and” in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29‑4003(1)(b)(i)(B) requires the trial court to consider both the factual basis and the presentence report, but does not condition registration on the presence of sexual contact evidence in both sources; thus the registration order is proper.
- No specific credibility finding is required; the trial court may rely on the record’s overall credibility assessment.
- Procedural due process was satisfied because the defendant received notice and an opportunity to be heard at the sentencing hearing.
- The advisement was merely informational and did not impose a prohibition; therefore no error.
Key quotations
“The text of § 29‑4003(1)(b)(i)(B) does not state that the trial court must find sexual penetration or sexual contact in both the factual basis and the PSR.” (at 867)
“We can discern no violation of Strawn’s right to procedural due process. The county court provided notice and a hearing, satisfying due‑process requirements.” (at 870)
Factual background
Strawn was convicted of two counts of third‑degree assault after entering a no‑contest plea. The presentence investigation report contained police statements indicating that Strawn had engaged in sexual contact with the victim J.B. The county court ordered him to register as a sex offender under SORA.
Procedural history
Strawn pleaded no contest to two counts of third‑degree assault. The county court, relying on the presentence report, ordered registration under the Sex Offender Registration Act. The district court affirmed. Strawn appealed directly to the Nebraska Supreme Court, bypassing the Court of Appeals.