State v. Iddings, 936 N.W.2d 747

Defendant Matthew Iddings pled no contest pursuant to a plea agreement to non‑aggravated DUI (fourth offense) after a traffic stop showing a .307 BAC and multiple prior DUI convictions.
The parties jointly agreed to recommend an 18‑month term of incarceration; defense counsel and the State asked to proceed immediately to sentencing and defense counsel stated Iddings waived a presentence investigation (PSI) in open court.
At sentencing the State said it had “struggled” but ultimately recommended 18 months because that term would be consecutive to a similar Sarpy County sentence; the court sentenced Iddings to an indeterminate term of 18 months to 5 years and awarded 136 days’ credit.
Iddings did not object at sentencing; the court stated a PSI would be impractical because Iddings was likely to be transported to another county but did not explicitly find a waiver.
On appeal Iddings argued (1) the State breached the plea agreement, (2) the court erred by failing to order a PSI, (3) the sentence was excessive/abused discretion, and (4) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to secure additional jail‑credit (58 days) and for failing to object to the alleged plea breach.

Issue	Iddings' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Plea‑agreement breach by State at sentencing	State undermined its promise by saying it had “struggled,” so Iddings should be allowed to withdraw plea or be resentenced	State ultimately recommended 18 months and did not effectively undermine the promise	No breach; State’s statement did not negate the recommendation; counsel not deficient for failing to object
Failure to order presentence investigation (PSI)	Court abused discretion by not ordering a PSI and thus failed to consider sentencing factors	Iddings (through counsel) waived the PSI and court reasonably found a PSI impractical	Waiver was knowing/intelligent (shown by counsel’s waiver in defendant’s presence and defendant’s acquiescence); no reversible error
Excessive sentence / abuse of discretion	Indeterminate 18 months–5 years exceeded agreed sentence and court failed to consider factors	Sentence within statutory limits; minimum equals agreed 18 months; defendant waived PSI and had opportunity to present mitigating facts	No abuse of discretion; sentence affirmed
Credit for time served & ineffective assistance for not raising it	Counsel should have requested additional 58 days’ credit under §83‑1,106(1)	Whether additional credit applies depends on facts outside the record	Claim cannot be resolved on direct appeal because record is insufficient to determine the entitlement to the extra 58 days

State v. Landera, 285 Neb. 243, 826 N.W.2d 570 (2013) (State may not effectively undermine a promised sentencing recommendation)
State v. Qualls, 284 Neb. 929, 824 N.W.2d 362 (2012) (standards for waiver of presentence investigation)
State v. Robeson, 25 Neb. App. 138, 903 N.W.2d 677 (Neb. Ct. App. 2017) (waiver of PSI may be inferred from counsel’s statement in defendant’s presence)
State v. Tolbert, 223 Neb. 794, 394 N.W.2d 288 (1986) (mandate to obtain PSI unless impractical)
State v. Albers, 276 Neb. 942, 758 N.W.2d 411 (2008) (functions and importance of PSI)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)