State v. Collins

299 Neb. 160 (2018) · Supreme Court of Nebraska · March 2, 2018 · No. S-17-147

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Fredrick A. Collins, Jr.'s motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. The court held that Collins failed to sufficiently allege ineffective assistance of counsel, including claims concerning jurisdiction, DNA testing, speedy trial, severance, testimony, discovery, and plea coercion. The court also affirmed the denial of appointed postconviction counsel because Collins presented no justiciable issue.

Court
Supreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the Court
Cassel, J.; Heavican, C.J.; Miller-Lerman, J.; Stacy, J.; Funke, J.; Kelch, J., participating on briefs
Jurisdiction
Nebraska
Decision date
March 2, 2018
Docket number
S-17-147
Procedural posture
Appeal from the denial of a motion for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing and denial of a motion to appoint postconviction counsel.
Standard of review
The appellate court reviews de novo whether the defendant alleged sufficient facts to demonstrate a constitutional violation or whether the files and records affirmatively show that the defendant is entitled to no relief. The denial of appointment of postconviction counsel is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
Published Nebraska Supreme Court opinion; precedential
Parties
Fredrick A. Collins, Jr. v. State of Nebraska
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

state post-conviction reliefineffective assistancespeedy trialright to counselappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal postconviction reliefineffective assistance of counselspeedy trialcriminal procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Collins alleged sufficient facts to require an evidentiary hearing on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims.
  2. Whether the record affirmatively showed that Collins was entitled to no relief on his claim that counsel failed to seek discharge on speedy-trial grounds.
  3. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying appointment of counsel in the postconviction proceeding.

Holdings

  1. A postconviction evidentiary hearing is not required when the defendant fails to allege facts supporting a constitutional violation or when the files and records affirmatively show that the defendant is entitled to no relief. Collins's claims concerning the information, DNA testing, severance, witness testimony, discovery, and coercion of his plea did not warrant a hearing because they were inadequately pleaded, lacked allegations of prejudice, or were refuted by the record.
  2. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to move for discharge because the speedy-trial deadline had not expired when Collins entered his plea. A failure to seek discharge can constitute ineffective assistance only if the motion would have resulted in an absolute discharge barring a later trial and conviction.
  3. As a matter of law, counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless argument.
  4. An indigent defendant is entitled to appointed postconviction counsel when the petition presents a justiciable issue, but appointment is not required when the claims are procedurally barred or meritless and present no justiciable issue of fact or law. Because Collins's claims did not warrant an evidentiary hearing, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying counsel.

Key quotations

To establish a right to postconviction relief because of counsel’s ineffective assistance, the defendant has the burden, in accordance with Strickland v. Washington, to show that counsel’s performance was deficient; that is, counsel’s performance did not equal that of a lawyer with ordinary training and skill in criminal law. (164)
Only if a motion would have resulted in the defendant’s absolute discharge, thus barring a later trial and conviction, could the failure to move for discharge be deemed ineffective assistance. (166)
As a matter of law, counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless argument. (167)

Factual background

Collins was originally charged with first degree sexual assault of a child and third degree sexual assault of a child. Under a plea agreement, he pleaded no contest to a reduced first degree sexual assault charge, the additional charge was dismissed, and he received a sentence of 10 to 15 years' imprisonment with credit for 396 days served. In postconviction proceedings, he alleged that trial counsel was ineffective in connection with the charging information, DNA testing, speedy trial, severance, witness testimony, discovery, and the plea agreement. The district court concluded that the claims were inadequately pleaded or refuted by the record and denied relief without an evidentiary hearing.

Procedural history

Collins pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of first degree sexual assault and was sentenced to 10 to 15 years' imprisonment. On direct appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed his sentence and declined to reach several ineffective-assistance claims because the record was insufficient. Collins later reasserted those claims in a motion for postconviction relief and sought appointment of counsel. The Douglas County District Court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing and denied appointment of counsel; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…