State v. Briggs, 303 Neb. 352

Background

Reginald B. Briggs was charged with first‑degree murder (victim Teresa Longo), use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony, possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited person, two pandering counts (Longo and Raynette Heidt), and two third‑degree domestic assault counts; he was alleged to be a habitual criminal.
The court severed the pandering count involving Heidt and the domestic assault counts, but allowed evidence of Briggs’ pandering of Heidt at the joint trial on the Longo‑related counts, finding it inextricably intertwined.
Trial evidence: Heidt testified about Briggs’ pimping of her and Longo and about Longo leaving with Briggs on Sept. 17, 2015; Jandreau testified Briggs admitted he shot “the white girl” and left a body at a house; Longo’s body was found with a close‑range shotgun wound to the back of the head.
Jury convicted Briggs of manslaughter (not first‑degree murder), use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony, possession by a prohibited person, and pandering (Longo); Briggs later pleaded no contest to the severed pandering (Heidt) charge.
The district court found Briggs a habitual criminal and imposed consecutive determinate sentences (including 20 years for manslaughter and 10 years for possession); Briggs appealed.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed convictions but found plain error in sentencing (failure to impose indeterminate sentences where statute required; duplicate jail‑credit award), vacated affected sentences, and remanded for resentencing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Briggs)	Held
Denial of motion to sever pandering (Longo)	Joinder was proper and not prejudicial	Joinder of pandering with murder/weapons was improper and prejudicial	No reversible error; Briggs failed to show compelling, specific prejudice (joined evidence was distinct and jury convicted on some but not all counts)
Admission of evidence of pandering of Heidt	Evidence was inextricably intertwined and necessary to present a coherent picture	Evidence was other‑acts barred by Neb. Evid. R. 404(2)	Admissible as inextricably intertwined with the charged offenses; Rule 404(2) did not apply
Fair‑cross‑section & Batson challenges to jury selection	Prosecutor used race‑neutral peremptory strikes; venire selection was not systematically discriminatory	Jury pool underrepresented minorities; peremptory strikes were race‑based	Fair‑cross‑section claim failed for lack of proof of systematic exclusion; Batson challenges rejected—prosecutor gave facially race‑neutral reasons and court did not clearly err in crediting them
Mistrials & motion to dismiss (after State rested)	Evidence (recorded call, references to incarceration) was relevant and harmless; denial of dismissal appropriate	Admission of recorded call and references to incarceration warranted mistrial; dismissal should have been granted at end of State’s case	Denial of mistrials not an abuse of discretion (curative instruction, stipulation to prior felony); Briggs waived appeal of denial of dismissal by introducing evidence after the court overruled it
Sufficiency for use of deadly weapon where manslaughter verdict prevailed	First‑degree assault (intentional) could be a predicate for weapon use even if jury convicted manslaughter	Jury’s manslaughter verdict shows underlying crime was unintentional; thus weapon‑use conviction improper	Affirmed: sufficient evidence supported first‑degree assault as a possible predicate; inconsistent verdicts do not permit overturning (Dunn/Powell rule)
Habitual criminal designation & sentencing form	Prior convictions qualified; sentencing within statutory range	Some prior convictions were impermissible double‑enhancements; sentences excessive and misformed	Habitual designation upheld (statutory interpretation from Abejide); but sentences for manslaughter and possession should have been indeterminate per §29‑2204 and jail‑credit award duplicated—vacated and remanded for resentencing

Key Cases Cited

State v. Cotton, 299 Neb. 650 (joinder/severance standard and prejudice requirement)
State v. Parnell, 294 Neb. 551 (inextricably intertwined other‑acts evidence)
State v. Smith, 286 Neb. 856 (404(2) and intertwined evidence principles)
State v. Clifton, 296 Neb. 135 (Batson three‑step analysis and evaluation of race‑neutral reasons)
State v. Sepulveda, 278 Neb. 972 (first‑degree assault can be predicate for weapon‑use conviction)
Dunn v. United States, 284 U.S. 390 (inconsistent jury verdicts do not require vacatur)
United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (reaffirming Dunn; verdict inconsistency rule)
State v. Abejide, 293 Neb. 687 (habitual criminal statute—prior convictions analysis)
State v. Thompson, 301 Neb. 472 (statutory requirement to impose indeterminate sentences)