State v. Gray , 307 Neb. 418 ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
    www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
    10/23/2020 01:07 AM CDT
    - 418 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    State of Nebraska, appellee, v.
    Neland T. Gray, Jr., appellant.
    ___ N.W.2d ___
    Filed October 2, 2020.    No. S-19-1173.
    1. Sentences: Appeal and Error. A sentence imposed within the statutory
    limits will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of an abuse of dis-
    cretion by the trial court.
    2. Judges: Words and Phrases. A judicial abuse of discretion exists
    only when the reasons or rulings of a trial judge are clearly untenable,
    unfairly depriving a litigant of a substantial right and denying a just
    result in matters submitted for disposition.
    3. Appeal and Error. For an alleged error to be considered by an appellate
    court, an appellant must both assign and specifically argue the alleged
    error in the party’s initial brief.
    4. ____. Where an appellant’s brief contains conclusory assertions unsup-
    ported by an analytical argument, the appellant fails to satisfy this
    requirement.
    5. Sentences: Appeal and Error. When sentences imposed within statu-
    tory limits are alleged on appeal to be excessive, the appellate court
    must determine whether the sentencing court abused its discretion in
    considering well-established factors and any applicable legal principles.
    6. Sentences. When imposing a sentence, a sentencing judge should con-
    sider the defendant’s (1) age, (2) mentality, (3) education and experi-
    ence, (4) social and cultural background, (5) past criminal record or
    record of law-abiding conduct, and (6) motivation for the offense, as
    well as (7) the nature of the offense, and (8) the amount of violence
    involved in the commission of the crime.
    7. ____. The sentencing court is not limited to any mathematically applied
    set of factors, but the appropriateness of the sentence is necessarily a
    subjective judgment that includes the sentencing judge’s observations
    of the defendant’s demeanor and attitude and all the facts and circum-
    stances surrounding the defendant’s life.
    - 419 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: Jodi
    L. Nelson, Judge. Affirmed.
    Nancy K. Peterson for appellant.
    Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Jordan Osborne
    for appellee.
    Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke,
    Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.
    Freudenberg, J.
    NATURE OF CASE
    In an appeal from a second degree murder conviction, the
    appellant challenges the district court’s imposition of a life sen-
    tence to run consecutively with a sentence of 25 to 35 years’
    imprisonment for use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony.
    According to the appellant, the district court abused its discre-
    tion by imposing an excessive sentence.
    BACKGROUND
    Pursuant to a plea agreement, Neland T. Gray, Jr., was con-
    victed of second degree murder, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat.
    § 28-304 (Reissue 2016), a Class IB felony, and use of a deadly
    weapon to commit a felony, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat.
    § 28-1205(1)(a) and (b) (Reissue 2016), a Class II felony. The
    district court imposed on Gray a life sentence for the second
    degree murder conviction and a consecutive sentence of 25 to
    35 years’ imprisonment for the use of a deadly weapon to com-
    mit a felony conviction.
    The convictions and sentences at issue arise out of
    events that occurred on December 31, 2018. Gray killed his
    ex-girlfriend, Dijah Ybarra, who was the mother of their two
    young children, by stabbing her at least 15 times. That eve-
    ning, Ybarra took the children to Gray’s mother’s home, where
    Gray was living. Gray previously agreed to watch the children
    while Ybarra went out to celebrate New Year’s Eve. But when
    Ybarra arrived, Gray informed her that he had decided to go
    - 420 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    out as well and had arranged for his aunt to watch the children
    instead. Gray rode with Ybarra to his aunt’s house where they
    dropped the children off. Ybarra then took Gray to another
    location where she had agreed to drop him off.
    After arriving, Ybarra discussed with Gray that she was
    moving on and had been dating another man. This discussion
    upset Gray. Gray pulled out a kitchen knife that he had taken
    from his mother’s house and began stabbing Ybarra. Gray ini-
    tially prevented Ybarra from exiting the car by grabbing her
    hair, but she was eventually able to get out and attempted to
    run away. Gray pursued Ybarra, continuing to stab her. Gray
    then left Ybarra bleeding and dying on the curb while he took
    her car and fled the scene. Gray called his mother and told her
    he was going to jail.
    According to the information in the presentence investiga-
    tion report, Gray had been physically and emotionally abusive
    to Ybarra throughout their relationship and had been in jail
    the previous year for assaulting her. During that prior alterca-
    tion, Gray also assaulted another woman who had attempted to
    intervene on Ybarra’s behalf. Gray then threatened the inter-
    vening woman’s fiance with a knife when the fiance verbally
    confronted Gray.
    While in jail after this incident and despite a protection order,
    Gray continued to contact Ybarra numerous times, threatening
    and verbally abusing her. Gray also assaulted other inmates
    while incarcerated.
    Gray was released from jail in early December 2018. Gray
    and Ybarra resumed their sexual relationship upon his release.
    Gray had wanted to reestablish a relationship. However, Ybarra
    was apparently involved with both Gray and another man dur-
    ing this time, which Gray reported caused him severe feelings
    of jealousy. According to interviews with Gray’s family and
    friends contained within the presentence investigation report,
    a couple of days before the murder, Ybarra and her new boy-
    friend had taunted Gray about their new relationship. The
    family and friends asserted that Ybarra’s boyfriend sent Gray
    - 421 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    pictures of himself with Gray’s children and Ybarra, claiming
    he was replacing Gray in Ybarra’s and his children’s lives.
    At sentencing, Gray’s counsel requested that Gray’s sentence
    allow for a release date early enough to allow Gray to still
    become a productive member of society. Defense counsel also
    argued that Gray’s sentence should take into account Gray’s
    age of 22 years, remorse, history of psychological issues, sub-
    stance abuse, and childhood exposure to domestic violence.
    The presentence investigation report sets forth that Gray was
    raised in an abusive household, struggled with his temper from
    a young age, consistently experienced domestic violence at
    home, and failed to learn any coping skills.
    Gray had been suspended multiple times from school for
    fighting, eventually being expelled. Gray ultimately obtained
    his diploma through the GED program and held multiple jobs,
    but never for longer than 7 months at a time.
    Gray has engaged in heavy alcohol and marijuana use since
    age 14, smoking marijuana six to eight times per day up until
    his incarceration in 2017. He also reported consuming a pint of
    hard liquor per day. Gray admitted that he was using alcohol
    heavily in the time following his release in December 2018 and
    that he had been drinking throughout the afternoon on the day
    of the murder.
    Gray has a significant criminal history, both as a juvenile
    and as an adult. Gray abused Ybarra physically, verbally, and
    emotionally throughout their tumultuous relationship. Multiple
    family members and friends had told Gray to move on and
    leave Ybarra alone.
    At the sentencing hearing, the district court stated that it had
    “carefully and thoughtfully considered [Gray’s early release]
    request, particularly in light of [Gray’s] age,” but reasoned that
    it was not appropriate in light of Gray’s history of violent crim-
    inal conduct, character, and flagrant violations of court orders.
    The district court observed that Gray had been “abusive, con-
    trolling, demeaning, possessive, and selfish” and had “shown a
    complete unwillingness to follow orders of the Court.”
    - 422 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    The court pointed out that Gray had contacted Ybarra mul-
    tiple times while incarcerated in “flagrant violation[]” of the
    protection order in place. The court further recognized that
    Gray’s postrelease supervision order prohibited Gray from hav-
    ing any contact with Ybarra; using, possessing, or consuming
    alcoholic beverages or controlled substances; possessing any
    weapons; and engaging in unlawful acts or acts injurious to
    others, and yet, Gray “demonstrated no regard whatsoever for
    that order.”
    The district court concluded that it was “impossible . . . to
    find that [Gray] at some time in the future will be amenable
    to the same type of supervision he was on at the time of this
    brutal murder” and that he is “a violent and dangerous man
    who has demonstrated an inability through incarceration or
    otherwise to co-exist with others without violence.”
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
    Gray assigns that the district court abused its discretion in
    imposing an excessive sentence.
    STANDARD OF REVIEW
    [1,2] A sentence imposed within the statutory limits will not
    be disturbed on appeal in the absence of an abuse of discretion
    by the trial court. 1 A judicial abuse of discretion exists only
    when the reasons or rulings of a trial judge are clearly unten-
    able, unfairly depriving a litigant of a substantial right and
    denying a just result in matters submitted for disposition. 2
    ANALYSIS
    [3-5] Gray alleges the life sentence for his second degree
    murder conviction was excessive. He does not specifically
    challenge the weapons conviction of 25 to 35 years’ imprison-
    ment. For an alleged error to be considered by an appellate
    court, an appellant must both assign and specifically argue the
    1
    State v. Smith, 
    240 Neb. 97
    , 
    480 N.W.2d 705
    (1992).
    2
    State v. Weaver, 
    267 Neb. 826
    , 
    677 N.W.2d 502
    (2004).
    - 423 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    alleged error in the party’s initial brief. 3 Where an appellant’s
    brief contains conclusory assertions unsupported by an ana-
    lytical argument, the appellant fails to satisfy this requirement. 4
    Gray’s conviction for second degree murder was punishable
    by a minimum of 20 years’ imprisonment and a maximum of
    life imprisonment. 5 When sentences imposed within statutory
    limits are alleged on appeal to be excessive, the appellate court
    must determine whether the sentencing court abused its discre-
    tion in considering well-established factors and any applicable
    legal principles. 6
    [6,7] When imposing a sentence, a sentencing judge should
    consider the defendant’s (1) age, (2) mentality, (3) education
    and experience, (4) social and cultural background, (5) past
    criminal record or record of law-abiding conduct, and (6) moti-
    vation for the offense, as well as (7) the nature of the offense,
    and (8) the amount of violence involved in the commission of
    the crime. 7 The sentencing court is not limited to any math-
    ematically applied set of factors, but the appropriateness of the
    sentence is necessarily a subjective judgment that includes the
    sentencing judge’s observations of the defendant’s demeanor
    and attitude and all the facts and circumstances surrounding the
    defendant’s life. 8
    Gray was 21 years old at the time of the murder and 22
    years old when he was sentenced. He argues that, in light of
    his age, a minimum sentence of life that would never allow
    for his parole eligibility is excessive. Gray relies on cases like
    State v. Iromuanya, 9 where we have reduced life sentences
    3
    See State v. Smith, 
    292 Neb. 434
    , 
    873 N.W.2d 169
    (2016).
    4
    See
    id. 5
        See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-105 (Cum. Supp. 2018).
    6
    See State v. Lassek, 
    272 Neb. 523
    , 
    723 N.W.2d 320
    (2006).
    7
    Id. See State v.
    Thieszen, 
    300 Neb. 112
    , 
    912 N.W.2d 696
    (2018).
    8
    See State v. Lassek, supra note 6. See, also, State v. Thieszen, supra note 7.
    9
    State v. Iromuanya, 
    272 Neb. 178
    , 
    719 N.W.2d 263
    (2006).
    - 424 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    based on the characteristics and history of the defendant. The
    defendant in Iromuanya was 23 years old when he committed
    second degree murder and had no significant criminal history.
    The defendant had fired a single shot, while at a party, which
    wounded one victim and killed another. We noted that by set-
    ting a minimum of life imprisonment, the court could not have
    imposed a more severe minimum term for second degree mur-
    der on a hardened criminal with a lengthy history of violent
    felony convictions. 10 We reiterated that a sentence should fit
    the offender and not merely the crime. 11
    Both Gray’s criminal history and the nature of his killing
    of Ybarra differ significantly from Iromuanya. Although Gray
    pleaded to a lesser charge, premeditation is indicated by the
    fact that Gray took a kitchen knife from his mother’s house,
    had it on his person when he entered Ybarra’s car, and manipu-
    lated the situation so that Ybarra would end up alone with him,
    where he used the knife to stab Ybarra over 15 times while in
    the car and as she attempted to flee.
    Gray has a long criminal history, including multiple con-
    victions of violent conduct with others and with Ybarra spe-
    cifically, including Gray’s being incarcerated for a year for
    assaulting Ybarra—his release being only weeks before this
    killing occurred. During that prior assault incident, Gray
    also assaulted another woman who attempted to intervene on
    Ybarra’s behalf and threatened the intervening woman’s fiance
    with a knife when he verbally confronted Gray.
    As the district court noted, Gray has shown no interest or
    effort to abide by court orders. Despite a protection order
    in place while Gray was incarcerated, Gray still contacted
    Ybarra numerous times, threatening and verbally abusing her.
    Gray repeatedly violated the prohibitions of his postrelease
    supervision by possessing the kitchen knife from his mother’s
    10
    Id. 11
    
    Id.
    - 425 -
    
                  Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    307 Nebraska Reports
    STATE v. GRAY
    Cite as 
    307 Neb. 418
    house, consuming alcohol, and having multiple contacts with
    Ybarra that evening that led to her death.
    The district court recognized the appropriate factors when
    imposing Gray’s life sentence despite his relatively young age.
    Further, the sentence properly reflected the seriousness of the
    crimes committed and Gray’s past criminal conduct. As the
    district court observed, Gray is a “violent and dangerous man
    who has demonstrated an inability through incarceration or
    otherwise to co-exist with others without violence.”
    A judicial abuse of discretion exists only when the reasons
    or rulings of a trial judge are clearly untenable, unfairly depriv-
    ing a litigant of a substantial right and denying a just result in
    matters submitted for disposition. 12 We find the district court
    did not abuse its discretion in imposing a life sentence in
    this matter.
    CONCLUSION
    The district court carefully considered all the relevant facts
    when it imposed the life sentence. Considering the totality of
    the circumstances, we cannot say that the sentence imposed
    by the district court was untenable. Gray’s assignment of error
    regarding the imposition of an excessive sentence is without
    merit. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm.
    Affirmed.
    12
    State v. Weaver, supra note 2.