State v. Davis, 310 Neb. 865

Background

Victim Brent Quigley was found dead from stab wounds after a June 2018 home robbery; investigation led to arrests of Christopher Reagan, Alisia Cooke, and Raymond T. Davis.
Davis was charged by information with first-degree murder (felony murder), robbery (later dismissed), conspiracy to commit robbery, and use of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony; jury convicted on murder, conspiracy, and weapon counts.
Co-defendant Alisia Cooke (plea agreement witness) testified that she, Reagan, and Davis planned the robbery, that Cooke lured Quigley via a social media account, and that Davis and Reagan entered and attacked Quigley; Cooke observed Davis with a knife/knife-like object and corroborated postincident division of stolen property.
Corroborating evidence included social-media/text messages between Cooke and Davis, cell-tower records placing their phones near the house, and DNA links (blood on a flashlight, DNA on a knife, Quigley’s DNA on jeans found with Davis’ belongings).
The State called Julie Skalberg, who testified about Davis arriving at her Iowa home; on direct the prosecutor used Skalberg’s prior written statement to police to elicit that Davis had said things were "getting crazy" in Council Bluffs—defense objected as improper impeachment; court overruled.
Davis appealed, arguing (1) the information’s conspiracy count failed to allege a proper overt act, (2) the evidence was insufficient (attacking Cooke’s credibility), and (3) the State improperly impeached its own witness (Skalberg).

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Davis' Argument	Held
Whether the information was fatally defective for failing to allege an overt act in the conspiracy count	The information alleged an overt act—robbery—and a substantive offense that is the object of a conspiracy can satisfy the overt-act requirement	The indictment impermissibly used the same act as both the object of the conspiracy and the overt act, so it failed to allege an overt act	Court rejected Davis; an overt act may be the substantive offense charged, so the information was sufficient
Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions	Cooke’s testimony plus corroborating messages, cell records, and DNA provided sufficient proof beyond a reasonable doubt	Cooke was a dishonest, drug-using witness whose testimony should not support conviction; conviction deprived Davis of due process	Court applied standard of view-most-favorable-to-prosecution and held evidence was sufficient; credibility was for the jury
Whether the State improperly impeached its own witness (Skalberg) with a prior statement	The State may attack its own witness’s credibility; Skalberg’s prior statement was used to show inconsistency and was harmless if erroneous	The State impeached its own witness without need, introducing inadmissible prior hearsay and prejudicing Davis	Even assuming error, the court found any improper impeachment harmless and unrelated to the jury’s verdict

Key Cases Cited

State v. Theisen, 306 Neb. 591, 946 N.W.2d 677 (Neb. 2020) (overt act alleged may be the substantive offense that is the conspiracy's object)
State v. Marco, 230 Neb. 355, 432 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 1988) (information must expressly allege one or more overt acts)
State v. Heitman, 262 Neb. 185, 629 N.W.2d 542 (Neb. 2001) (overt act manifests intent and advances conspiracy beyond mere talk)
State v. Coleman, 209 Neb. 823, 311 N.W.2d 911 (Neb. 1981) (fundamental defects in information may be raised on appeal)
State v. Walker, 272 Neb. 725, 724 N.W.2d 552 (Neb. 2006) (form/content objections to information should be raised by motion to quash)
State v. Williams, 306 Neb. 261, 945 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2020) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
State v. Dominguez, 290 Neb. 477, 860 N.W.2d 732 (Neb. 2015) (limits on impeaching one’s own witness with prior inconsistent statements)
State v. Figures, 308 Neb. 801, 957 N.W.2d 161 (Neb. 2021) (harmless error review focuses on whether the actual verdict is surely unattributable to the error)