State v. Case, 937 N.W.2d 216

On Feb. 16, 2018, inmate Trevor S. Case left his cell in the Lancaster County jail, approached fellow inmate Kenneth Burley, and a physical altercation occurred; surveillance video and witness testimony captured the incident.
Case was charged with assault by a confined person under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-932 and tried by jury; he testified claiming fear of Burley and asserted self-defense.
The State introduced surveillance video and a jail telephone recording (made Feb. 19) in which Case said, “I went for him”; Case objected that the recording was produced to defense one day before trial in violation of the discovery order.
The district court overruled the discovery objection (Case did not request a continuance) and admitted the recording; the court also refused Case’s proposed self-defense jury instruction.
The jury convicted Case; the court sentenced him to 365 days in jail plus 12 months postrelease supervision. Case appealed, arguing erroneous refusal of a self-defense instruction, improper admission of the telephone recording, and insufficient evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Case)	Held
Whether the trial court erred by refusing a self-defense instruction	The evidence shows Case initiated contact and unjustifiably placed himself in harm’s way, so no instruction was warranted	Any evidence that Burley threatened or made a motion (a "jab") required a self-defense instruction under precedent	Court: Refusal affirmed — evidence did not support a legally cognizable self-defense theory because Case left his cell and initiated the confrontation
Whether the telephone recording should have been excluded for belated discovery	The recording was produced once discovered and the proper remedy would be a continuance, not exclusion	Late production violated § 29-1912 and required exclusion or sanction	Court: Admission affirmed — Case waived remedy by not requesting a continuance after the court overruled his objection
Whether evidence was sufficient to support conviction	Video, witness testimony, injuries, and Case’s statement support finding he intentionally/knowingly/recklessly caused bodily injury	Case contends evidence is insufficient and relies on self-defense claim	Court: Conviction affirmed — viewed favorably to prosecution, a rational juror could find elements beyond a reasonable doubt

State v. Bigelow, 303 Neb. 729, 931 N.W.2d 842 (Neb. 2019) (standard for reviewing jury instruction correctness)
State v. Hatfield, 933 N.W.2d 78 (Neb. 2019) (waiver of discovery remedy where continuance would suffice)
State v. Stubbendieck, 302 Neb. 702, 924 N.W.2d 711 (Neb. 2019) (appellate standard for sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Graham, 234 Neb. 275, 450 N.W.2d 673 (Neb. 1990) (self-defense instruction warranted only where jury could reasonably find use of force justified)
State v. Kinser, 252 Neb. 600, 567 N.W.2d 287 (Neb. 1997) (instruction required only when there is any evidence supporting a legally cognizable theory of self-defense)
State v. Urbano, 256 Neb. 194, 589 N.W.2d 144 (Neb. 1999) (a defendant who unjustifiably places himself in harm’s way cannot claim lawful self-defense)
State v. Marshall, 253 Neb. 676, 573 N.W.2d 406 (Neb. 1998) (defendant cannot create occasion for use of force and then claim self-defense)
State v. Smith, 284 Neb. 636, 822 N.W.2d 401 (Neb. 2012) (self-defense is a statutory affirmative defense)
State v. Montoya, 933 N.W.2d 558 (Neb. 2019) (reiterating sufficiency review standard)