State v. Barrera-Garrido, 895 N.W.2d 661

Arturo Barrera-Garrido pled no contest in 2014 to first-degree false imprisonment and to use of a deadly weapon (knife) to commit a felony; a first-degree sexual assault charge was dismissed.
The State’s factual basis described holding the victim captive overnight, threats with a knife, and an incident of forced or coerced oral sex; a knife was later found in the patrol cruiser.
The district court found the pleas knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis and sentenced Barrera-Garrido to consecutive terms.
In 2015 he filed a postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel: failure to explain charges/evidence, failure to investigate/pursue witnesses or a self-defense theory, coercion/pressuring into a plea, and failure to advise on plea consequences.
The district court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, finding the plea colloquy and the record refuted or failed to support his allegations.
Barrera-Garrido appealed; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding the motion either lacked required factual specificity or was contradicted by the record.

Issue	Barrera-Garrido's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether counsel failed to adequately explain charges and evidence	Counsel did not fully explain charges/evidence; therefore plea was not knowing	Plea colloquy and court advisements show he understood charges and had no questions	Court: No hearing required; record refutes prejudice and shows understanding
Whether counsel failed to investigate witnesses or pursue defenses (self-defense)	Counsel failed to interview witnesses and pursue self-defense based on alleged threats	Motion lacked names/details of witnesses or how further investigation would have aided defense	Court: No hearing; allegations conclusory and no plausible showing of prejudice
Whether counsel failed to negotiate a plea or coerced plea	Counsel did not negotiate and pressured him into a disadvantageous plea	Plea hearing confirms a negotiated agreement (dismissal of sexual assault) and voluntariness	Court: No hearing; record shows negotiated plea and voluntary entry
Whether postconviction motion warranted an evidentiary hearing	(Aggregate) Motion alleges ineffective assistance meriting hearing	Files and records affirmatively show no relief due; many claims are conclusory	Court: Denied hearing; affirmed on appeal—claims insufficient or contradicted by record

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (counsel’s failure to advise on immigration consequences can state Strickland deficiency; prejudice still required)
State v. Robertson, 294 Neb. 29 (standard of de novo review for sufficiency of postconviction allegations)
State v. Ely, 295 Neb. 607 (prejudice standard; appellate review when district court denies hearing)
State v. Armendariz, 289 Neb. 896 (prejudice in plea cases measured by whether defendant would have insisted on trial)
State v. Harrison, 293 Neb. 1000 (no hearing required when motion alleges only conclusions or record shows no relief)
State v. Payne, 289 Neb. 467 (postconviction as first opportunity to raise trial counsel ineffectiveness)
State v. Yos-Chiguil, 281 Neb. 618 (self-serving assertions of would-have-gone-to-trial insufficient without objective evidence)