State v. Chairez, 302 Neb. 731

Background

On June 11, 2017, Habacuc Quintero Chairez shot at a vehicle on I-80; occupants were not injured. Troopers found Chairez in his car, he displayed a handgun, was arrested, and later admitted (with an interpreter present) he fired because he thought the vehicle was following him and that he was a felon on federal parole.
Chairez pleaded no contest pursuant to a plea agreement to: possession of a firearm by a prohibited person (Class ID), attempted first degree assault (Class IIA), and use of a firearm to commit a felony (Class IC); a related count was dismissed and the State agreed not to seek habitual enhancements.
The district court imposed an aggregate sentence of 42 to 55 years with credit for time served; Chairez appealed, represented by new counsel.
On appeal Chairez argued (1) his sentences were excessive and (2) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to (a) meet with him using an interpreter, (b) investigate and interview exculpatory witnesses/collect digital evidence, and (c) move to suppress his custodial statements made while allegedly under the influence.
The plea colloquy included an interpreter, but Chairez answered in English, repeatedly stated he understood the proceedings, that counsel had performed competently, that counsel had not refused any requested action, and that he understood immigration and mandatory-minimum consequences.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not using an interpreter in attorney-client meetings	Chairez: counsel failed to use an interpreter, so Chairez did not understand legal terms or consequences, producing deficient performance and prejudice	State: plea colloquy shows Chairez understood proceedings, counsel advised him, and he expressly said counsel did everything he asked	Held: No ineffective assistance — record shows Chairez understood and affirmed counsel's performance
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate/collect evidence from wife/mother and interview witnesses about threats	Chairez: counsel failed to pursue exculpatory digital evidence and witnesses about cartel threats that could support an affirmative defense or mitigation	State: plea colloquy statements confirm Chairez told counsel all relevant information and was satisfied with counsel's investigation	Held: No ineffective assistance — Chairez’s own unchallenged statements in the record refute the claim
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress custodial statements (Miranda waiver while allegedly meth-affected)	Chairez: he told counsel he was under meth influence; waiver involuntary; counsel should have filed suppression motion	State: record is inadequate to resolve the claim on direct appeal	Held: Record insufficient to review on direct appeal; remand for evidentiary development would be appropriate if Chairez pursues collateral relief
Whether the aggregate sentence (42–55 years) was excessive	Chairez: sentence did not fit his history, character, condition; court should have considered mitigating factors	State: sentence within statutory limits and supported by violent criminal history in PSI	Held: No abuse of discretion — sentence within statutory limits and justified by defendant’s violent record

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-pronged ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Filholm, 287 Neb. 763 (Neb. 2014) (standards for reviewing ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal)
State v. Vanderpool, 286 Neb. 111 (Neb. 2013) (definition of deficient performance standard)
State v. Dixon, 286 Neb. 334 (Neb. 2013) (appellate review of sentences within statutory limits)
State v. Huff, 282 Neb. 78 (Neb. 2011) (appellate disturbance of within-guidelines sentence requires abuse of discretion)