Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed Jason D. Devers' convictions for first degree felony murder and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony. The court rejected challenges concerning the termination of a witness deposition, admission of controlled-substance and firearm evidence, and the sufficiency of the evidence regarding Devers' intent and aiding-and-abetting liability. The court also concluded that the ineffective-assistance claims reaching the merits on direct appeal lacked merit.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by terminating a witness deposition and refusing to exclude the witness after the defendant failed to seek a second deposition.
- Whether evidence of controlled substances found at Devers' home and a firearm recovered at Benson Towers was irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial.
- Whether any error in admitting testimony about multiple packages of marijuana was harmless.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish Devers' intent or knowledge concerning the robbery and use of a firearm.
- Whether the record permitted review on direct appeal of Devers' claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
Holdings
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by terminating the witness deposition and denying Devers' motion to exclude the witness because the court authorized Devers to seek a second deposition and sufficient time remained before trial.
- Arguments and theories not raised below, and alleged errors not preserved by a timely objection, generally will not be considered on appeal.
- The controlled-substance evidence was relevant to corroborate testimony and was not subject to exclusion because its probative value was substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
- The firearm evidence was relevant and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
- Assuming without deciding that testimony referring to multiple packages of marijuana was erroneously admitted, the error was harmless because the guilty verdicts were surely unattributable to the isolated reference.
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational fact finder to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Devers intended, knew, or expected Goynes to commit the robbery and knew or could be held responsible for the use of a firearm.
- On direct appeal, the court decides only ineffective-assistance claims that can be conclusively resolved from the existing record; claims must identify the alleged deficient conduct with sufficient specificity, but the appellant need not allege prejudice merely to preserve the claim.
Key quotations
“Circumstantial evidence is not inherently less probative than direct evidence.” (451)
“When a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel is raised in a direct appeal, the appellant is not required to allege prejudice; however, an appellant must make specific allegations of the conduct that he or she claims constitutes deficient performance by trial counsel.” (454)
Factual background
In the early morning of January 6, 2018, Kyle LeFlore was shot and killed outside Reign Lounge in Omaha. The evidence showed that Devers identified LeFlore as a robbery target, drove Goynes to the area, waited for Goynes to return after the shooting, and then transported him away. Searches yielded ammunition and controlled substances associated with evidence presented at trial, and a firearm wrapped in a T-shirt was recovered from an apartment connected to Devers' relatives. A jury convicted Devers of first degree felony murder and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony.
Procedural history
The Douglas County District Court denied Devers' motions concerning a witness deposition, controlled substances, and firearm evidence; denied his motion to dismiss on statutory and constitutional speedy-trial grounds; and proceeded to trial. The jury acquitted Devers of possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited person but convicted him of first degree felony murder and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony. The district court imposed life imprisonment for murder and a consecutive term of 5 to 5 years for use of a deadly weapon. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.