3 N.W.3d 334
Neb.2024Background
- DeShawn L. Gleaton, Jr. was convicted of first degree murder and related offenses after fatally shooting his ex-girlfriend, Hailey Christiansen, in her home in Norfolk, Nebraska, in July 2020.
- Evidence included cell phone location data, Snapchat videos in which Gleaton admitted to the shooting, and his confession during police interrogation.
- At trial, an expert (Hurley) analyzed Verizon "round-trip time" (RTT) cell data to track movements of the phones involved.
- After conviction, Gleaton was sentenced to life plus consecutive terms for related offenses, with 413 days’ credit for time served initially applied to the life sentence.
- Gleaton appealed, challenging the admissibility of RTT expert evidence, closing arguments, victim impact letters in the PSR, and alleging judicial misconduct at sentencing.
- The State cross-appealed the application of time-served credit to the life sentence, arguing it should apply to the consecutive terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of RTV Cell Data Expert Testimony | Hurley’s use of RTT cell data was unreliable; evidence lacked peer review, urban context differed, and software was untested | RTT methodology was shown reliable in prior cases; methodology explained and corroborated by other evidence | No abuse of discretion; limitations on expert testimony handled appropriately; evidence admissible |
| Prosecutorial Misconduct in Closing Argument | Prosecutor’s references to "social contract" and victim’s last words improperly appealed to emotion and societal obligation | Comments addressed law and responded to defense argument; did not improperly influence jury | Prosecutor's remarks not improper; no abuse of discretion in overruling objections |
| Victim Impact Letters in PSR | Letters from non-victims and those with characterizations/opinions should be excluded from PSR; risk of review by corrections/parole | Statute does not prohibit letters from non-statutory victims in noncapital cases; judge disregarded improper material | No reversible error; judge properly limited consideration and letters need not be stricken |
| Judicial Misconduct at Sentencing | Judge’s questions about motive, gang involvement, and background showed bias and violated defendant’s rights | Judge was gathering sentencing information, not showing bias; no unconstitutional conduct | No misconduct; judge’s questions could not lead reasonable person to doubt impartiality |
| Application of Credit for Time Served | Time served credit improperly applied to life sentence | (Conceded by appellant) | Plain error; credit applied to non-life sentences, not life sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court adopted gatekeeping role for trial judges regarding expert evidence)
- Schafersman v. Agland Coop, 262 Neb. 215 (Nebraska adopted Daubert standard for scientific expert testimony)
- State v. Trail, 312 Neb. 843 (RTT data/phone location used in homicide investigation; prior application of expert method)
- State v. Simmer, 304 Neb. 369 (abuse of discretion standard for admissibility of expert evidence)
- State v. Ely, 287 Neb. 147 (no credit for time served against life sentence; credit applies to consecutive non-life terms)
- State v. Pattno, 254 Neb. 733 (impartiality and judicial misconduct standard at sentencing)