Nadeem v. State
298 Neb. 329
| Neb. | 2017Background
- In 2010 Mohammed Nadeem was convicted of attempted first- and third-degree sexual assault of a 14-year-old based on meetings and a later police-arranged “controlled call.”
- The Court of Appeals vacated his convictions and remanded for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel and a denied entrapment instruction; Nadeem served part of his sentence before those rulings.
- Nadeem filed a wrongful conviction claim under the Nebraska Claims for Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment Act, alleging actual innocence and entrapment.
- The State moved to dismiss under Neb. Ct. R. Pldg. § 6-1112(b)(6), arguing entrapment cannot show actual innocence; the district court granted the motion.
- The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal, analyzing only the complaint’s allegations; the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review and reversed the Court of Appeals, holding Nadeem failed to plead actual innocence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court of Appeals could consider its prior criminal-opinion when reviewing a § 6-1112(b)(6) dismissal | Nadeem relied on and cited the prior opinion in his complaint; the opinion is part of the public record and "embraced by the pleadings" | State argued the Court of Appeals should consider its prior opinion because it is embraced by the complaint and dispositive on sufficiency | The Supreme Court held the prior Court of Appeals opinion is embraced by the complaint and may be considered, but only limited portions are relevant |
| Whether the complaint sufficiently alleged "actual innocence" under § 29-4603(3) | Nadeem alleged lack of requisite intent and factual assertions that he engaged only in innocent conduct and was entrapped | State argued the complaint relied on legal conclusions and prior-opinion findings; entrapment or lack of intent alone does not show actual innocence | Held that Nadeem failed to plead actual innocence. Legal conclusions and restatements of the prior opinion are ignored; mere lack of intent or entrapment allegations do not satisfy the statute |
| Whether a vacated conviction precludes a wrongful-conviction claim by res judicata | Nadeem implied prior adjudication forecloses consideration of his current claims | State suggested the prior opinion’s findings undermine actual-innocence allegations | Court held vacatur deprived the prior judgment of conclusive res judicata effect; res judicata did not bar the wrongful-conviction claim, but plaintiff still must plead actual innocence |
Key Cases Cited
- Hess v. State, 287 Neb. 559 (2014) (distinguishing legal innocence from actual innocence; actual innocence requires absence of facts constituting the crime)
- DMK Biodiesel v. McCoy, 285 Neb. 974 (2013) (documents embraced by the pleadings and part of public record may be considered on a motion to dismiss)
- Davis v. State, 297 Neb. 955 (2017) (standard of review for dismissal: accept complaint allegations as true and draw inferences for nonmoving party)
- State on behalf of Hopkins v. Batt, 253 Neb. 852 (1998) (elements and effect of res judicata)
- Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333 (1992) (discussion of the colloquial meaning of actual innocence)