State v. Carter
292 Neb. 16
| Neb. | 2015Background
- Victor L. Carter was convicted in 1986 of first-degree murder and a firearm enhancement; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
- Carter filed multiple postconviction motions (1989, 2002, 2008, 2012) and was repeatedly denied relief; he filed a fifth postconviction motion in May 2014.
- The Douglas County District Court summarily overruled the May 2014 postconviction motion on November 18, 2014; Carter appealed (No. S-14-1089) and sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP).
- On the court’s own motion, the district court denied Carter’s IFP application for the appeal on December 23, 2014, concluding the underlying postconviction motion was frivolous; Carter appealed that denial separately (No. S-15-024).
- The Supreme Court consolidated review of the IFP-denial appeal and the substantive postconviction appeal procedures; it affirmed the IFP denial and held the substantive appeal in abeyance pending payment of the docket fee within 30 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate court has jurisdiction over appeal from denial of IFP without payment of docket fee | Carter: timely notice of appeal plus IFP application and affidavit suffice to invoke jurisdiction | State: jurisdiction lacking because docket fee unpaid | Court: Jurisdiction exists where appellant timely files notice plus proper IFP application and affidavit (Glass controlling) |
| Whether district court properly denied IFP because underlying postconviction motion was frivolous | Carter: his postconviction motion raising State v. Smith and Alleyne issues merited review | State: motion was frivolous and successive; Alleyne inapplicable; Smith already raised in 2012 | Court: Motion frivolous; Alleyne did not apply; successive claim barred; IFP denial affirmed |
| Whether Alleyne affects elements vs sentencing-factor distinction in Nebraska murder case | Carter: Alleyne makes absence of "sudden quarrel" an element altering sentencing floor | State: Alleyne concerns facts increasing mandatory minima; sudden quarrel is not a sentencing factor under Nebraska law | Court: Alleyne irrelevant; the absence/presence of sudden quarrel is not a sentencing-factor issue that invokes Alleyne |
| Whether successive postconviction motion raising previously litigated Smith claim is permissible | Carter: relied on Smith and new federal decisions to reassert claim | State: claim was previously raised in 2012; successive motions barred unless new basis unavailable earlier | Court: Successive motions barred absent showing basis was unavailable earlier; Smith already used in 2012; claim frivolous |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Carter, 226 Neb. 636, 413 N.W.2d 901 (affirming convictions) (background on original conviction)
- Glass v. Kenney, 268 Neb. 704, 687 N.W.2d 907 (2004) (timely notice plus proper IFP application and affidavit confer appellate jurisdiction to review IFP denial)
- State v. Phelps, 286 Neb. 89, 834 N.W.2d 786 (successive postconviction motions not entertained unless basis was unavailable earlier)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (elements vs sentencing-factors framework relied upon to reject Alleyne-based claim)