State v. Hood, 917 N.W.2d 880

Background

December 2013 head-on collision on U.S. Highway 26; Hood was driving one vehicle, the other driver died and a passenger suffered serious injuries.
Officers and medical personnel smelled alcohol on Hood at the scene and hospital; a bottle of brandy was found in Hood’s vehicle; Hood admitted drinking beer the prior night and refused a preliminary breath test and a law-enforcement-requested blood draw (citing needle aversion as a recovering heroin addict).
Hospital personnel drew blood for diagnostic purposes with Hood’s consent; law enforcement later subpoenaed those samples but the district court suppressed them pretrial.
At trial the State introduced evidence of Hood’s refusal to submit to a warrantless blood test and offered the victim’s death certificate over Hood’s Confrontation Clause objection; the jury convicted Hood of motor vehicle homicide, manslaughter, DUI causing serious bodily injury, and refusal to submit to a preliminary breath test.
Hood appealed, arguing (1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to pursue a diminished-capacity defense, (2) Birchfield-related error in admitting evidence of his refusal to submit to a warrantless blood draw, and (3) Confrontation Clause error in admitting the death certificate without sponsoring testimony.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed: it rejected Hood’s ineffective-assistance claim on the record, held refusal evidence admissible in DUI prosecutions post-Birchfield under Nebraska law, and deemed admission of the death certificate harmless error.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Hood)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Ineffective assistance for not pursuing diminished-capacity defense	Trial counsel was deficient for failing to investigate or present evidence that Hood suffered psychosis/bipolar/schizophrenia that negated intent	Record shows Hood was coherent enough (consented to blood draw, spoke with mother, gave history); counsel’s strategy reasonable; claim insufficiently particularized	Record refutes deficient performance; claim fails as a matter of law
Admissibility of evidence of refusal to submit to warrantless blood draw (post-Birchfield)	Birchfield prohibits using refusal evidence to infer guilt where blood draw was warrantless; jury shouldn’t infer guilt from exercise of constitutional rights	Nebraska statute (§ 60-6,197(6)) and prior Nebraska cases permit refusal evidence; Birchfield does not bar admission of refusal evidence in DUI prosecutions	Evidence of refusal to submit to a warrantless blood draw is admissible in a DUI prosecution under Nebraska law
Confrontation Clause and admission of death certificate without sponsoring testimony	Death certificate contained statements by county attorney that are testimonial; admission without author testimony violated Crawford	Time, place, and cause of death were uncontested and certificate was cumulative of other evidence; any error harmless	Admission was error but harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; conviction stands
Preservation/particularity of appellate ineffective-assistance claim	Appellate presentation aimed to avoid procedural bar to postconviction review	Appellant must make specific allegations on direct appeal; generalized assertions are insufficient	Appellate claim was too generalized; adequate particularity lacking; claim not sustained

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (2016) (limits on warrantless blood draws; discussion of implied-consent consequences)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (testimonial statements and Confrontation Clause rule)
State v. Rask, 294 Neb. 612 (Neb. 2016) (Nebraska law permitting refusal evidence under § 60-6,197(6))
State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941 (Neb. 2017) (analysis of § 60-6,197 post-Birchfield; as-applied limits on refusal convictions)
State v. Hoerle, 297 Neb. 840 (Neb. 2017) (consent and good-faith doctrines for pre-Birchfield blood draws)
State v. Vosler, 216 Neb. 461 (Neb. 1974) (discussion that various mental conditions can bear on specific intent)