State v. Smith ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                          IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS
    MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
    (Memorandum Web Opinion)
    STATE V. SMITH
    NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION
    AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY NEB. CT. R. APP. P. § 2-102(E).
    STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE,
    V.
    WILLIAM R. SMITH, APPELLANT.
    Filed March 28, 2023.    No. A-22-697.
    Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: ANDREW R. JACOBSEN, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    Douglas L. Kerns for appellant.
    Michael T. Hilgers, Attorney General, and Melissa R. Vincent for appellee.
    PIRTLE, Chief Judge, and RIEDMANN and ARTERBURN, Judges.
    RIEDMANN, Judge.
    INTRODUCTION
    William R. Smith appeals his plea-based convictions and sentences entered by the
    Lancaster County District Court. He assigns that his sentences were excessive and that his trial
    counsel was ineffective. Having reviewed his claims and the record, we affirm his convictions and
    sentences.
    BACKGROUND
    On February 24, 2022, Dashana Baker, who was dating Smith and shared a child with him,
    was out for the night and returned home in the early morning hours of February 25. Smith became
    angry and accused Baker of “cheating.” Smith physically assaulted her, causing injury to her nose
    and shoulder. Smith then pinned her down with both of his hands on her neck and applied pressure
    until she lost consciousness. When Baker regained consciousness, she was still in the same position
    -1-
    with Smith on top of her, and Smith grabbed her by her hair, pulled her off the bed, and threw her
    down the stairs.
    Baker went back upstairs because her children were standing across the hall and crying
    while watching the assault. Smith continued the assault and held a pocketknife with an
    approximately three inch blade against her throat. When one of her children verbally intervened,
    he told the child to shut up or he would kill Baker. Smith again threw Baker down the stairs.
    Smith took the child he shared with Baker and instructed the other children to go to their
    rooms. He forced Baker and the child into a vehicle and started driving to the residence of Javen
    Fisher. Smith told Baker she should call her children’s father because she would never see the
    children again. When they arrived at Fisher’s residence, Smith slashed a hole in the passenger tire
    of Fisher’s vehicle. While Smith and Fisher engaged in a physical altercation, Baker was able to
    drive away. After arriving home, she collected her belongings and her other children, and contacted
    law enforcement.
    In addition to the injuries to Baker’s face and shoulder described above, she had redness,
    abrasions, and cuts on the front, sides, and back of her neck. After contacting Fisher, officers
    observed that his vehicle had a flat rear passenger tire caused by a one-and-a-half-inch laceration
    on the tire. Fisher reported that Smith had come to his residence in the early morning hours to
    confront him about issues, that the two argued, and Smith punched him. Fisher had swelling on
    the side of his face.
    The State charged Smith with nine counts, including three felonies, but as the result of a
    plea agreement, the charges were reduced to three counts: third degree domestic assault, a Class I
    misdemeanor; child abuse, a Class I misdemeanor; and third degree assault, a Class I misdemeanor.
    Smith pled no contest to the charges. The district court accepted Smith’s pleas and found him
    guilty of the charges. A presentence investigation report was ordered. For his conviction of third
    degree domestic assault, Smith received a sentence of 360 days’ imprisonment; for his conviction
    of child abuse, Smith received a sentence of 90 days’ imprisonment; and for his conviction of third
    degree assault, Smith received a sentence of 30 days’ imprisonment. The sentences were ordered
    to be served consecutively and Smith received credit for 185 days’ time served. Smith appeals.
    ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
    Smith assigns that the district court abused its discretion in imposing an excessive sentence,
    and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because trial counsel overstated the
    favorability of the plea agreement and failed to contact defense witnesses and procure exculpatory
    evidence.
    STANDARD OF REVIEW
    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. State v. Blake, 
    310 Neb. 769
    , 
    969 N.W.2d 399
    (2022).
    Whether a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel can be determined on direct
    appeal presents a question of law, which turns upon the sufficiency of the record to address the
    claim without an evidentiary hearing or whether the claim rests solely on the interpretation of a
    statute or constitutional requirement. State v. Stelly, 
    304 Neb. 33
    , 
    932 N.W.2d 857
     (2019). An
    -2-
    appellate court determines as a matter of law whether the record conclusively shows that (1)
    defense counsel’s performance was deficient or (2) a defendant was or was not prejudiced by a
    defense counsel’s alleged deficient performance. 
    Id.
    ANALYSIS
    Excessive Sentences.
    Smith argues the district court abused its discretion by imposing excessive sentences.
    However, in light of the length of sentences imposed and credit for time served, we issued a show
    cause order directing the parties to advise this court whether Smith remained incarcerated. We
    cautioned that failure to respond would be cause for this court to consider the issue moot. See State
    v. Campbell, 
    24 Neb. App. 861
    , 
    900 N.W.2d 556
     (2017) (holding excessive sentence claim moot
    where appellant has served sentence). Neither party filed a response.
    While it is not a constitutional prerequisite for jurisdiction, the existence of an actual case
    or controversy is necessary for the exercise of judicial power. Johnston v. Nebraska Dept. of Corr.
    Servs., 
    270 Neb. 987
    , 
    709 N.W.2d 321
     (2006). A case becomes moot when the issues initially
    presented in the litigation cease to exist, when the litigants lack a cognizable interest in the outcome
    of litigation, or when the litigants seek to determine a question which does not rest upon existing
    facts or rights, in which the issues presented are no longer alive. 
    Id.
    Smith was sentenced on August 29, 2022, to consecutive sentences totaling 480 days. With
    good time reduction pursuant to 
    Neb. Rev. Stat. § 47-502
     (Reissue 2021) and credit for time served,
    Smith was required to serve 63 days. Based on our calculations and the parties’ failure to respond
    to the order to show cause, we conclude that Smith has been released; thus, his assigned error
    relating to the length of his sentences is moot.
    Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.
    Smith argues he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel when counsel overstated
    the favorability of the plea agreement and failed to contact defense witnesses and procure
    exculpatory evidence as requested. To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the
    defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient, and that this deficient performance
    prejudiced their defense. State v. Anderson, 
    305 Neb. 978
    , 
    943 N.W.2d 690
     (2020).
    In reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, an appellate court
    decides only whether the undisputed facts contained within the record are sufficient to conclusively
    determine whether counsel did or did not provide deficient performance and whether the defendant
    was or was not prejudiced by counsel’s alleged performance. 
    Id.
     The record on direct appeal is
    sufficient to review a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel if it establishes either that trial
    counsel’s performance was not deficient, that the appellant will not be able to establish prejudice,
    or that trial counsel’s actions could not be justified as a part of any plausible trial strategy. 
    Id.
    Smith’s claim that trial counsel was ineffective in overstating the favorability of the plea
    agreement involves discussions that occurred between Smith and trial counsel. No information on
    these discussions appears in the record. As such, the record on direct appeal is insufficient to
    address this claim. Because Smith is no longer in custody, we make no comment regarding his
    ability to further pursue this claim.
    -3-
    Smith also alleges trial counsel was ineffective in failing to contact defense witnesses.
    When the claim of ineffective assistance on direct appeal involves uncalled witnesses, vague
    assertions that counsel was deficient for failing to call “witnesses” are little more than placeholders
    and do not sufficiently preserve the claim. State v. Blake, 
    310 Neb. 769
    , 
    969 N.W.2d 399
     (2022).
    However, the appellate court does not need specific factual allegations as to what the person or
    persons would have said, which will not be found in the appellate record. 
    Id.
     It is sufficient that
    appellate counsel give on direct appeal the names or descriptions of any uncalled witnesses
    forming the basis of a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. 
    Id.
     Such specificity is
    necessary so that the postconviction court may later identify whether a particular claim of failing
    to investigate a witness is the same one that was raised on direct appeal. 
    Id.
    Smith has failed to provide either the names or descriptions of the witnesses he claims trial
    counsel failed to contact; therefore, he has failed to state this claim with the specificity required
    and it is not preserved for any subsequent action, if one is available. See State v. Lee, 
    304 Neb. 252
    , 
    934 N.W.2d 145
     (2019).
    Smith also alleges trial counsel was ineffective in failing to procure exculpatory evidence.
    However, he provides no details as to what this evidence would consist of or what it would show.
    This claim has not been stated with the specificity required and is not preserved. See 
    id.
    CONCLUSION
    Because Smith has already served his sentences in this case, his assignment of error related
    to the excessiveness of his sentences is moot. Having reviewed his claims of ineffective assistance
    of trial counsel, we find that they either cannot be addressed on the record before this court or are
    insufficiently stated. We affirm the judgment of the district court.
    AFFIRMED.
    -4-