State v. Davis, 982 N.W.2d 261

In June 2021 Davis was charged with multiple offenses arising from repeated assaults on his pregnant girlfriend; facts included punching and strikes with the handle of a metal baseball bat.
Pursuant to a plea agreement Davis pled no contest to third-degree domestic assault on a pregnant woman and second-degree domestic assault (both Class IIIA felonies); the State agreed not to seek habitual-offender treatment.
The district court reviewed the PSI, found Davis had an extensive criminal history and a high risk to reoffend, noted lack of remorse, and sentenced him to consecutive terms of 3 years’ imprisonment plus 18 months post-release supervision on each count (within statutory limits), with 275 days credit.
On appeal Davis challenged: (1) denial of his requests to replace appointed counsel; (2) alleged excessive sentences; and (3) ineffective assistance of trial counsel (failure to communicate/withhold information; requesting a continuance over Davis’s objection; filing pretrial motions that delayed speedy-trial rights).
The Court of Appeals affirmed: it deemed the counsel-replacement challenge waived by the plea, upheld the sentences as not an abuse of discretion, and rejected the ineffective-assistance claims as either insufficiently pleaded or refuted by the record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Davis)	Held
Denial of motion to discharge appointed counsel / appoint new counsel	Denial need not be reviewed because defendant waived collateral challenges by pleading no contest	Court erred by refusing to replace counsel after deterioration of attorney-client relationship	Waived by plea; court will not consider on appeal
Sentence excessive	Sentences are within statutory ranges and reflect appropriate consideration of factors and public protection	Sentences are excessive given mitigating facts	Not excessive; within statutory limits and no abuse of discretion
Ineffective assistance — failure to communicate / withholding information from court	Claims lack specificity; record does not conclusively show deficient performance	Counsel failed to disclose victim’s communications indicating noncooperation, undermining Davis’s ability to decide how to proceed	Assigned errors insufficiently specific for direct-review; not resolved on record
Ineffective assistance — continuance / pretrial motions / speedy trial delay	Record shows speedy-trial deadline had not elapsed when Davis pled; motions/continuances did not prejudice him	Counsel prejudiced Davis by continuing trial and filing unwanted motions, delaying trial	Failed: speedy-trial clock had not run at plea; counsel not ineffective on these grounds

State v. Weathers, 304 Neb. 402, 935 N.W.2d 185 (Neb. 2019) (standard for reviewing requests to dismiss appointed counsel)
State v. Blake, 310 Neb. 769, 969 N.W.2d 399 (Neb. 2022) (guilty/no-contest plea waives defenses except voluntariness and ineffective assistance)
State v. Morton, 310 Neb. 355, 966 N.W.2d 57 (Neb. 2021) (sentences within statutory limits reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Drake, 311 Neb. 219, 971 N.W.2d 759 (Neb. 2022) (standards for deciding ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal)
State v. Thomas, 311 Neb. 989, 977 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. 2022) (plea waives challenges unrelated to voluntariness or ineffective assistance)
State v. Lierman, 305 Neb. 289, 940 N.W.2d 529 (Neb. 2020) (sentencing factors and subjective nature of appropriateness)
State v. Devers, 306 Neb. 429, 945 N.W.2d 470 (Neb. 2020) (requirement to plead specific deficient conduct on direct appeal)
State v. Mrza, 302 Neb. 931, 926 N.W.2d 79 (Neb. 2019) (appellate courts will not scour briefs; assignments of error must specifically allege deficiency)
State v. Collins, 299 Neb. 160, 907 N.W.2d 721 (Neb. 2018) (analysis of speedy-trial computation and prejudice under Strickland)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)