Nadeem v. State
298 Neb. 329
| Neb. | 2017Background
- In 2009 Nadeem, then 22, met a 14-year-old girl in a public library, exchanged numbers, and later returned to the library after a controlled call by police; he was arrested and convicted of attempted first- and third-degree sexual assault of a minor.
- The Court of Appeals vacated his convictions and remanded for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of an entrapment instruction; Nadeem completed his sentence before the vacatur.
- In 2015 Nadeem sued the State under the Nebraska Claims for Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment Act, alleging actual innocence (including entrapment) and seeking damages.
- The State moved to dismiss under Neb. Ct. R. Pldg. § 6-1112(b)(6), arguing entrapment cannot establish actual innocence as required by § 29-4603(3); the district court granted dismissal.
- The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed, treating the complaint’s allegations as sufficient; the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding Nadeem’s complaint failed to plead actual innocence (distinct from legal innocence) with sufficient nonconclusory factual allegations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court of Appeals could consider its prior criminal-opinion when reviewing a motion to dismiss | Nadeem cited the prior opinion in his complaint; the Court of Appeals should be confined to the complaint but may reference embraced documents | State: the prior appellate opinion is necessarily embraced by the complaint and may be considered on dismissal | The Supreme Court: the prior opinion is embraced by the complaint and may be considered, though only limited portions are relevant |
| Whether the complaint sufficiently pleaded actual innocence as required by § 29-4603(3) | Alleged lack of requisite intent and entrapment; claimed he did not take a substantial step toward the crime and was "entirely innocent" | State: allegations are conclusory and insufficient; entrapment/ lack of intent does not equal actual innocence | Held: complaint fails. Actual innocence requires absence of facts establishing the offense (more than lack of intent); many allegations were legal conclusions or quotes from prior opinion and cannot support the claim |
| Whether vacatur of conviction prevents res judicata from blocking the wrongful-conviction claim | Nadeem: vacatur allows him to press wrongful-conviction claim | State: prior finding that evidence was sufficient undermines actual innocence allegation | Held: vacatur deprives the prior conviction of conclusive res judicata effect, so this does not bar the wrongful-conviction claim—but plaintiff still must plead actual innocence adequately |
| Pleading standard on a § 6-1112(b)(6) motion in wrongful-conviction claims | Nadeem: notice pleading suffices; his factual allegations are adequate | State: courts may consider public records/embraced documents and ignore conclusory assertions when testing sufficiency | Held: accept well-pleaded facts and embraced documents; ignore legal conclusions and unsupported inferences—under that standard, Nadeem’s complaint fails to state actual-innocence facts |
Key Cases Cited
- Hess v. State, 287 Neb. 559 (2014) (distinguishes legal innocence from actual innocence and defines each)
- DMK Biodiesel v. McCoy, 285 Neb. 974 (2013) (materials embraced by pleadings and public records may be considered on a motion to dismiss)
- Davis v. State, 297 Neb. 955 (2017) (standard of appellate review for dismissal under § 6-1112(b)(6))
- Kellogg v. Nebraska Dept. of Corr. Servs., 269 Neb. 40 (2005) (courts may disregard legal conclusions and unwarranted inferences when testing pleadings)
- Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333 (1992) (example of ‘‘actual innocence’’ as conviction of the wrong person)
- State on behalf of Hopkins v. Batt, 253 Neb. 852 (1998) (elements of res judicata)