State v. Barrera-Garrido, 296 Neb. 647

In 2014, Arturo Barrera-Garrido pled no contest to first‑degree false imprisonment and to using a deadly weapon (knife) to commit a felony; a separate first‑degree sexual assault count was dismissed.
The State’s factual basis described holding his then‑girlfriend (M.C.) captive overnight, threatening her with a knife, and evidence that a knife was found in the patrol cruiser.
The district court accepted the pleas after colloquy, finding they were knowing, intelligent, and voluntary; advisements included immigration consequences.
Barrera‑Garrido was sentenced to consecutive terms (5 years and 15–20 years).
In 2015 he filed a postconviction motion claiming trial counsel was ineffective for (1) failing to explain charges/evidence, (2) failing to investigate witnesses and pursue a self‑defense theory, and (3) coercing him into pleading and failing to negotiate—seeking an evidentiary hearing.
The district court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, finding the plea colloquy and the record refuted his claims; Barrera‑Garrido appealed and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Barrera‑Garrido)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether counsel failed to adequately explain charges/evidence	Counsel did not fully explain charges or review evidence, so plea was not knowing	Plea colloquy and court advisements show Barrera‑Garrido understood charges and had no questions	Court held no hearing required; record refuted prejudice and voluntariness
Whether counsel failed to investigate witnesses / pursue defenses	Counsel failed to interview witnesses Barrera‑Garrido identified and did not pursue self‑defense based on alleged threats	Motion lacked names/details of witnesses or what exculpatory evidence they'd provide; no plausible showing self‑defense would succeed	Court held allegations were conclusory; no hearing required
Whether counsel coerced/failed to negotiate plea agreement	Counsel pressured him into an unfavorable plea and did not negotiate	Plea record shows an agreement: two pleas in exchange for dismissal of sexual assault count; court asked if he understood benefit	Court found record shows a negotiated plea and voluntariness; no hearing required

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (counsel’s failure to advise on immigration consequences can be constitutionally deficient; prejudice still required)
State v. Robertson, 294 Neb. 29 (standard of review for postconviction proceedings)
State v. Ely, 295 Neb. 607 (prejudice inquiry under Strickland)
State v. Armendariz, 289 Neb. 896 (prejudice when plea entered: defendant must show he would have insisted on trial)
State v. Harrison, 293 Neb. 1000 (when no evidentiary hearing is required)
State v. Yos‑Chiguil, 281 Neb. 618 (self‑serving assertions of wanting trial insufficient for hearing)
State v. Payne, 289 Neb. 467 (postconviction timing when appellate rights preserved by counsel)