State v. Barnes, 927 N.W.2d 64

In 1994 Richard C. Barnes pled guilty to first‑degree murder and use of a weapon to commit a felony; he received life imprisonment for murder and 6 2/3 to 20 years on the weapon count. The sentencing order did not award credit for time served.
Barnes did not file a direct appeal from the 1994 judgment.
In 2004 Barnes sought postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance for failure to file a requested direct appeal and arguing the sentencing court erred by not awarding jail credit; the district court denied relief.
This Court affirmed in State v. Barnes, holding Barnes failed to prove counsel was asked to file an appeal and that sentencing claims were procedurally barred on postconviction review.
In 2018 Barnes filed a pro se “Motion/Request for Jail Credit Pursuant to N.R.S. sec: 83‑1,106(1),” seeking to collaterally correct the 1994 sentence to reflect credit for time served; the district court denied the motion as it had no authority to amend the 1994 sentencing order.
Barnes appealed; the Supreme Court affirmed, holding the 2018 motion was a collateral attack on an erroneous but not void sentence and there is no statutory or common‑law authority permitting such collateral relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Barnes)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the sentencing court plainly erred by failing to calculate and award credit for time served at sentencing	Barnes: court plainly erred and must be remanded to calculate and grant jail credit under § 83‑1,106(1)	State: Barnes’ claim is a collateral attack on a final sentence; absent voidness, relief is not available	Held: No relief. Failure to award jail credit is erroneous, not void; collateral attack is impermissible, so district court correctly denied the motion
Whether § 83‑1,106(1) allows a collateral motion to correct a final sentence that omitted credit for time served	Barnes: § 83‑1,106(1) and State v. Esquivel support correction of omitted jail credit	State: The statute requires credit but does not create a new collateral‑attack remedy; prior cases allowing correction were on direct appeal	Held: § 83‑1,106(1) does not authorize collateral attack; Esquivel and Groff arose on direct appeal and do not permit collateral relief

State v. Barnes, 272 Neb. 749, 724 N.W.2d 807 (affirming denial of postconviction relief; sentencing credit claims procedurally barred)
State v. Groff, 247 Neb. 586, 529 N.W.2d 50 (direct appeal precedent requiring sentencing courts to separately state jail credit)
State v. Esquivel, 244 Neb. 308, 505 N.W.2d 736 (holding judge must determine and state amount of credit under § 83‑1,106(1), decided on direct appeal)