State v. Casares
291 Neb. 150
| Neb. | 2015Background
- On Dec. 30, 2012, Tyler Schoenrock was found shot dead; investigation identified Adrian M. Casares and Miguel Castillo as suspects.
- Casares was arrested and ultimately pleaded no contest to an amended information charging aiding and abetting second-degree murder (Class IB felony) pursuant to a plea agreement; court accepted plea after extended colloquy and factual basis stating Casares drove Schoenrock to a rural area and shot him.
- A lengthy presentence investigation report (PSI) and related materials were considered at sentencing; Casares received life-to-life imprisonment.
- On direct appeal (with new counsel), Casares raised multiple ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims (failure to take depositions, deficient advocacy at sentencing, failure to obtain a drug/alcohol evaluation, failure to review discovery with client, and an alleged promise of a 30–60 year sentence) and argued his sentence was excessive.
- The court found the record insufficient to review some claims (failure to take depositions; failure to review discovery), rejected other ineffective-assistance claims on the merits, and upheld the life-to-life sentence as within statutory limits and not an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to take depositions (Guevara, Cisneros, Nevins) | These witnesses were critical and their depositions would show Castillo was the shooter and impeach his statements | Record does not show whether depositions were taken; insufficient record on direct appeal to evaluate | Insufficient record to review; claim not reached on merits |
| Ineffective advocacy at sentencing (letters, victim impact statements, inclusion of depositions) | Counsel should have excluded or added certain materials to the PSI to mitigate sentence or undermine Castillo's credibility | Letters and statements were in the record; many were permissible or discretionary for PSI; Castillo credibility not outcome-determinative at sentencing | Counsel not deficient on letters or victim-impact statements; inclusion of depositions would not likely have changed sentence; claim without merit |
| Failure to obtain drug/alcohol evaluation | A separate evaluation would have provided mitigating detail to humanize Casares | PSI already contained extensive substance-use and background material; additional eval would be cumulative | No reasonable probability sentence would differ; claim without merit |
| Promise of specific sentence (30–60 years) inducing plea | Counsel allegedly promised a 30–60 year sentence to obtain plea | Plea colloquy shows Casares denied any promises or inducements and acknowledged understanding of sentencing uncertainty | Record affirmatively refutes promise claim; claim without merit |
| Excessive sentence (life-to-life) | Sentence excessive, partly because co-defendant Castillo got 55–70 years | Castillo pleaded to different offenses and cooperated; disparity explained by different charges and cooperation; court considered PSI and sentencing factors | Sentence within statutory limits and not an abuse of discretion; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- State v. Filholm, 287 Neb. 763 (2014) (direct-appeal review of ineffective-assistance claims depends on sufficiency of the record)
- State v. McGuire, 286 Neb. 494 (2014) (appellate review standard for sentences within statutory limits and counsel-effectiveness principles)
- State v. Dixon, 286 Neb. 334 (2014) (factors a sentencing judge should consider and abuse-of-discretion review)
- State v. Sidzyik, 281 Neb. 305 (2010) (egregious trial-counsel error on direct appeal is rare; record must show clear lack of merit to dispose on appeal)