State v. Detwiler, A-17-101

Police executed a search warrant (Dec. 3, 2015) at a home leased by Paul Detwiler and his wife Holly near Gering, Nebraska, and found a Remington 870 shotgun (between mattress and box-spring), ammunition, and a trigger-lock; weapon not fingerprinted or DNA-tested.
Detwiler stipulated he was a felon prohibited from possessing firearms; State originally charged possession between Nov. 12–Dec. 3, 2015; at the close of the State’s case the information was amended to allege Oct. 1–Dec. 3, 2015 (to match lease dates and pawnshop evidence).
Evidence supporting Detwiler’s connection to the residence included: lease with both names, testimony from the couple’s children that Detwiler lived there and handled long guns, Detwiler’s video interview indicating he lived at the property, and pawnshop records showing Holly retrieved the shotgun in October 2015.
Contradictory testimony placed Detwiler working and maintaining residence in Colorado (probation officer, employer, neighbor testimony), and Holly testified at trial that the firearm was hers and Detwiler didn’t know about it.
Jury convicted Detwiler of possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited person (Class ID felony); court sentenced him to 3 years; Detwiler appealed arguing (1) improper amendment of the information, (2) insufficient evidence, and (3) erroneous denial of new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether permitting amendment of the information (expand date range) after State’s case violated due process	State: date not element; amendment merely conformed charge to evidence; defendant had prior discovery of the evidence	Detwiler: amendment came after State’s case so witnesses were released and he was prejudiced—no chance to re-cross; inadequate notice	Court: Allowed amendment; no unfair prejudice or due process violation; dates not substantive element.
Whether evidence was sufficient to prove possession by a prohibited person	State: testimony (children, lease, interviews, pawn records) supported constructive possession and Detwiler’s dominion/control	Detwiler: lived and worked in Colorado; only name on lease and application tie him to house; no actual possession shown	Court: Evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution supports constructive possession; sufficient to convict.
Whether motion for new trial should have been granted	State: no trial error; sufficient evidence	Detwiler: new trial warranted due to amended information and insufficient evidence	Court: Denial affirmed—no abuse of discretion given prior holdings.

State v. Piskorski, 218 Neb. 543, 357 N.W.2d 206 (amendment to conform information to evidence permissible)
State v. Collins, 281 Neb. 927, 799 N.W.2d 693 (criminal information may be amended before verdict if no prejudice)
State v. Samayoa, 292 Neb. 334, 873 N.W.2d 449 (time of offense generally not a substantive element)
State v. Long, 8 Neb. App. 353, 594 N.W.2d 310 (constructive possession applies to felon-in-possession charge)
State v. Howard, 282 Neb. 352, 803 N.W.2d 450 (constructive possession defined and applied)