State v. Jones

307 Neb. 809 (2020) · Supreme Court of Nebraska · November 13, 2020 · No. No. S-20-184

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court held that Akeem R. Jones was entitled to a hearing on his motion to reinstate an appeal allegedly lost because of negligence by prison officials. The court concluded that his verified allegations, supported by an unsworn memorandum, were sufficient to require a hearing and that the district court improperly resolved factual and hearsay issues without one. The judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for a hearing.

Court
Supreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the Court
Miller-Lerman, J.; Heavican, C.J.; Cassel, J.; Stacy, J.; Funke, J.; Papik, J.
Jurisdiction
Nebraska
Decision date
November 13, 2020
Docket number
No. S-20-184
Procedural posture
Jones appealed the Douglas County District Court's denial, without a hearing, of his verified motion to vacate or modify the judgment and reinstate his appeal from the denial of postconviction relief.
Standard of review
Questions of law are reviewed independently of the lower court's conclusions.
Precedential value
Published precedential opinion of the Nebraska Supreme Court
Parties
Akeem R. Jones v. State of Nebraska
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

appellate procedurepost-conviction reliefpresumptionshearsayevidence

Practice areas

criminal appellate procedurestate post-conviction reliefevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a party who alleges that an appeal was lost because of official negligence may seek relief through a motion in the lower court requesting an opportunity to establish the basis for reinstatement of the appeal.
  2. Whether the district court erred by denying Jones's verified motion without a hearing when the motion alleged under oath that prison officials negligently delayed mailing his poverty affidavit.
  3. Whether the unsworn, hearsay-based prison memorandum conclusively disproved Jones's verified allegations and justified denial of the motion without an evidentiary hearing.

Holdings

  1. When an appeal is lost due to official negligence, the party seeking relief must file a motion in the lower court seeking the ability to establish the factual basis for obtaining relief.
  2. A verified motion alleging that prison officials negligently delayed timely submission of appellate paperwork is sufficient to obtain a hearing at which the movant may present proof of official negligence.
  3. The presumption that public officers faithfully performed their official duties may be overcome by evidence to the contrary, and a verified allegation of irregular handling of legal mail is sufficient to warrant a hearing on whether the presumption has been rebutted.
  4. An unsworn memorandum based on hearsay, including multiple layers of hearsay, does not conclusively defeat a verified motion alleging official negligence and cannot alone justify denial of the motion without a hearing.

Key quotations

The appropriate filing procedure when an appeal is lost due to official negligence is for the party seeking relief to file a motion in the lower court, seeking the ability to establish the basis for obtaining relief. (at 813)
As in our recent case, State v. Parnell, 301 Neb. 774, 919 N.W.2d 900 (2018), Jones’ claim of official negligence was sufficient to obtain a hearing at which to submit proof to the court of his allegation of official negligence. (at 816)
We reiterate that we do not adopt a prison delivery rule, see State v. Smith, 286 Neb. 77, 834 N.W.2d 799 (2013), and State v. Parmar, 255 Neb. 356, 586 N.W.2d 279 (1998), nor do we hold that a delay in mailing necessarily results in an untimely filing. (at 816)

Factual background

Jones's postconviction petition was denied, and his attempted appeal was dismissed because his request to proceed in forma pauperis and poverty affidavit were filed after the appellate deadline. Jones alleged under oath that he submitted the paperwork through the prison mail system before the deadline, but prison staff mishandled and delayed the mail. He attached an unsworn memorandum from a prison case manager describing returned mail and staff negligence. The district court relied on the memorandum and denied relief without a hearing, concluding that the paperwork had been submitted too late regardless of any later mishandling.

Procedural history

Jones was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. After his direct appeal was unsuccessful, the district court denied his postconviction petition without an evidentiary hearing. Jones attempted to appeal, but the Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed that appeal for lack of jurisdiction because his in forma pauperis request and poverty affidavit were filed after the deadline. Jones then moved in the district court to reinstate the appeal, alleging that prison officials negligently delayed mailing his paperwork. The district court denied the motion without a hearing, and the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a hearing.

Remand instructions

The district court must conduct a hearing at which Jones may offer evidence that negligence by prison officials at the Nebraska State Penitentiary delayed mailing of the poverty affidavit associated with his prior appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…