State v. Parnell

301 Neb. 774 (2018) · Supreme Court of Nebraska · November 30, 2018 · No. No. S-18-413

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court held that a postconviction litigant alleging that official negligence prevented a timely appeal is entitled to a hearing to present evidence supporting that allegation. The court reversed the denial of Tracy N. Parnell’s motion without a hearing and remanded for proceedings to determine whether he received the order denying postconviction relief.

Court
Supreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the Court
Heavican, C.J.; Miller-Lerman, J.; Cassel, J.; Stacy, J.; Funke, J.; Papik, J.
Jurisdiction
Nebraska
Decision date
November 30, 2018
Docket number
No. S-18-413
Procedural posture
Appeal from the denial, without a hearing, of a motion to vacate or modify the judgment in a postconviction proceeding.
Standard of review
Questions of law are reviewed independently of the lower court's conclusions.
Precedential value
published opinion
Parties
Tracy N. Parnell v. State of Nebraska
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

post-conviction reliefappellate procedurestandard of reviewremedies

Practice areas

criminal procedurepostconviction reliefappellate procedureremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court erred by denying Parnell's motion to vacate or modify the judgment without holding a hearing on his allegation that he did not receive the order dismissing his postconviction motion.
  2. What procedure applies when an appeal is lost because of alleged official negligence.

Holdings

  1. The district court erred by denying Parnell's motion without a hearing because his allegation that he did not receive the dismissal order, together with his request to present proof, was sufficient to obtain a hearing.
  2. When an appeal is lost because of official negligence, the party seeking relief must file a motion in the lower court seeking an opportunity to establish the basis for relief.

Key quotations

This was sufficient to obtain a hearing on his claim for official negligence. (301 Neb. at 777)
Whether the presumption can be successfully rebutted will depend on the evidence presented. (301 Neb. at 777)

Factual background

Parnell was convicted of first degree murder, attempted first degree murder, two counts of use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony, and possession of a weapon by a prohibited person. After this court affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal, he filed a motion for postconviction relief. The district court dismissed that motion, and Parnell alleged that he never received the dismissal order and thus lost the opportunity to file a timely appeal. He sought a hearing to present evidence rebutting the presumptions that the order had been properly mailed and that public officers had performed their duties.

Procedural history

Parnell filed a motion for postconviction relief, which the district court dismissed without an evidentiary hearing. He later alleged that he had not received the dismissal order and therefore could not timely appeal, and he moved to vacate or modify the judgment and requested a hearing. The district court denied that motion without a hearing, and Parnell appealed.

Remand instructions

The district court must hold a hearing at which Parnell may offer evidence concerning his assertion that he never received the order dismissing his motion for postconviction relief.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…