State v. Dalton, 949 N.W.2d 752

Dalton was charged with seven felonies arising from three deaths and entered a plea agreement on December 10, 2018, pleading guilty to multiple counts in exchange for the State waiving pursuit of the death penalty.
He waived a presentence investigation, requested immediate sentencing, and received consecutive life and lengthy term sentences; no direct appeal was filed.
On April 8, 2019, Dalton filed a postconviction motion claiming (1) trial counsel failed to file a direct appeal after Dalton requested it, (2) counsel failed to investigate (no deposition of the lone eyewitness, no mental-health evaluation), rendering his pleas unknowing/invalid, and (3) his sentences were excessive under the Eighth Amendment.
The district court held an evidentiary hearing only on the failure-to-appeal claim, admitted depositions of Dalton and his trial counsel (Cindy Tate), and found Tate credible: she informed Dalton of appeal rights, sent a form letter explaining how to appeal, and was never instructed to file an appeal. The court denied the direct-appeal claim on that basis and denied the other claims without an evidentiary hearing as insufficiently pleaded.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed denial of the failure-to-file-appeal claim (no request proved), held the excessive-sentence claim was procedurally barred, but vacated and remanded the district court’s disposition of the failure-to-investigate ineffective-assistance claim under State v. Determan for further proceedings.

Issue	Dalton's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to file a direct appeal	Dalton says he asked counsel (via a mailed letter and limited access) to file an appeal; counsel’s failure to do so entitles him to relief	Tate (State) says she informed Dalton of appeal rights, sent a form letter, received no instruction to appeal, and Dalton left no corroborating evidence	Affirmed for State: district court’s credibility finding for Tate not clearly erroneous; no ineffective assistance because Dalton did not request an appeal
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate (depose eyewitness, obtain mental-health eval), rendering pleas unknowing/invalid	Dalton contends inadequate investigation led to an uninformed plea; seeks new trial or relief	State argued the district court properly found insufficient pleaded facts and denied without hearing	Vacated and remanded: under Determan the court must not resolve non-direct-appeal ineffective-assistance claims until the direct-appeal claim is finally resolved; further proceedings required
Whether Dalton’s sentences were cruel and unusual / excessive	Dalton alleged Eighth Amendment excessive sentences	State argued claim is procedurally barred because no direct appeal was taken	Affirmed for State: excessive-sentence claim procedurally barred on postconviction where defendant could have appealed directly

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Determan, 292 Neb. 557 (2016) (district court must resolve failure-to-file-appeal claims first and enter a final order before addressing other postconviction ineffective-assistance claims)
State v. Hessler, 295 Neb. 70 (2016) (prejudice presumed where counsel disregards an express instruction to file an appeal)
State v. Beehn, 303 Neb. 172 (2019) (postconviction evidentiary-hearing standards; Strickland application)
Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996) (right of access to the courts)
Ex parte Hull, 312 U.S. 546 (1941) (prisoner’s right to seek courts free from interference)
State v. Moore, 272 Neb. 71 (2006) (postconviction relief cannot be used to review issues that could have been raised on direct appeal)