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 a 2009 library encounter and a later controlled call and meeting arranged by police.
- His convictions were vacated by the Nebraska Court of Appeals and remanded for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of an entrapment instruction; Nadeem served part of his sentence before vacatur.
- In 2015 Nadeem sued the State under the Nebraska Claims for Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment Act seeking damages, alleging actual innocence (including an entrapment theory).
- The State moved to dismiss under Neb. Ct. R. Pldg. § 6-1112(b)(6), arguing entrapment does not establish actual innocence and that Nadeem failed to plead actual innocence as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4603.
- The district court granted dismissal. The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed, focusing on notice pleading and accepting Nadeem’s allegations that he lacked intent and did not take a substantial step.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review, considered the Court of Appeals’ prior criminal-opinion material as embraced by the pleadings, but held Nadeem’s complaint failed to plead actual innocence and reinstated the dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appellate court could consider its prior criminal-opinion on a motion to dismiss | Nadeem relied on and cited the prior opinion in his complaint; the opinion is part of the public record embraced by the pleadings | State: the prior opinion is necessarily embraced and therefore may be considered on dismissal | Court: prior opinion is embraced by the complaint and may be considered, but only limited portions are relevant |
| Whether Nadeem sufficiently pleaded "actual innocence" under § 29‑4603(3) | Nadeem alleged lack of requisite intent and that he did not take a substantial step toward commission of the crime (entrapment theory) | State: entrapment or lack of intent does not equal actual innocence; complaint lacks factual allegations showing absence of the factual prerequisites of the crime | Court: plaintiff must plead actual (factual) innocence, not merely lack of intent or legal defenses; Nadeem’s complaint was conclusory and failed to allege absence of facts necessary for the crime, so dismissal proper |
| Effect of vacated conviction on wrongful-conviction claim | Nadeem: vacatur permits wrongful-conviction claim; vacatur does not preclude pleading actual innocence | State: prior appellate finding of sufficient evidence undermines claim of actual innocence | Court: vacated conviction lacks res judicata effect here; prior appellate finding may be considered but does not foreclose pleading actual innocence |
| Pleading standard on motion to dismiss for statutory wrongful conviction claim | Nadeem: notice pleading suffices; allegations of innocence and procedural vacatur meet § 29‑4603 requirements at pleading stage | State: statutory elements must be pleaded, including actual innocence with factual support; conclusory allegations insufficient | Court: notice pleading required, but courts may disregard conclusory legal allegations; complaint must allege facts supporting actual (factual) innocence; Nadeem failed to do so |
Key Cases Cited
- Hess v. State, 287 Neb. 559, 843 N.W.2d 648 (2014) (distinguishes legal innocence from actual innocence; actual innocence requires absence of facts that are prerequisites for the offense)
- DMK Biodiesel v. McCoy, 285 Neb. 974, 830 N.W.2d 490 (2013) (materials embraced by pleadings and public‑record documents may be considered on a motion to dismiss)
- Davis v. State, 297 Neb. 955, 902 N.W.2d 165 (2017) (de novo review standard for dismissals; accept complaint allegations as true and draw inferences for nonmoving party)
- Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333 (1992) (U.S. Supreme Court explanation of "actual innocence" concept as convicting the wrong person)
- Kellogg v. Nebraska Dept. of Corr. Servs., 269 Neb. 40, 690 N.W.2d 574 (2005) (courts may ignore legal conclusions and conclusory allegations when evaluating pleadings)
- State on behalf of Hopkins v. Batt, 253 Neb. 852, 573 N.W.2d 425 (1998) (res judicata prerequisites summarized)