State v. Alarcon-Chavez, 295 Neb. 1014

Background

In 2011 Leodan (Leodan) Alarcon-Chavez was tried by jury for first-degree murder, use of a deadly weapon, and tampering with a witness for the stabbing death of Maria Villarreal; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
He filed a postconviction motion (fourth amended) alleging multiple instances of trial counsel ineffectiveness and a problem understanding a Spanish court interpreter; an evidentiary hearing was held.
Key trial facts: Alarcon-Chavez arrived at victim’s apartment pre-dawn, was found standing over the victim holding knives, admitted stabbing her and relied at trial on a theory of self-defense; identity was not disputed.
Postconviction claims included: failure to record voir dire; failure to raise a Batson challenge; failure to timely communicate/secure a plea; failure to contact/call defense witnesses; failure to advise/obtain independent DNA testing; failure to depose State experts; failure to object during trial; and inability to understand an interpreter.
The district court denied relief after finding trial counsel’s strategic decisions reasonable and Alarcon-Chavez failed to show deficient performance or prejudice. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Voir dire not recorded	Counsel deficient for failing to ensure verbatim record; no waiver	Recording not mandatory absent request; no evidence counsel or court requested it	No deficient performance or prejudice; denial affirmed
Batson challenge not raised	Counsel should have objected when State struck a Hispanic juror	Counsel strategically agreed juror was undesirable and would have struck peremptorily	Strategic decision reasonable; no ineffectiveness
Plea offer communications	Counsel failed to timely convey plea; offer withdrawn before acceptance processed	Counsel testified he timely communicated and prosecutor refused any offer	Court credited counsel’s testimony; no ineffective assistance shown
Investigation / witnesses / objections / DNA / expert depositions	Counsel failed to interview/call witnesses, obtain DNA testing, depose experts, or object to testimony/exhibits causing prejudice	Counsel located only one potential witness who was hostile; chose not to elicit prior-violence evidence; DNA/identity irrelevant; experts reviewed; objections insubstantial	Strategic decisions were reasonable; no deficient performance or reasonable probability of different outcome
Interpreter comprehension	Could not understand one Spanish interpreter (Cuban dialect) and thus could not assist defense	Record shows interpreter experienced, defendant told counsel he generally understood, court visits with private interpreter occurred; no direct challenge on appeal	Claim procedurally barred (could have been raised on direct appeal) and trial court’s findings not clearly erroneous

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test: deficient performance and prejudice)
Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (right to effective counsel extends to plea negotiations)
State v. Branch, 290 Neb. 523 (standards for ineffective assistance review in Nebraska)
State v. Jones, 246 Neb. 673 (rule that transcription of voir dire required only upon request)
State v. Alarcon-Chavez, 284 Neb. 322 (prior direct-appeal opinion affirming convictions)
State v. Benzel, 269 Neb. 1 (prejudice standard and related ineffective-assistance guidance)