State v. Jackson, 296 Neb. 31

Background

Michael T. Jackson was convicted of first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, and related weapon charges and sentenced to life plus additional terms; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
Jackson filed a first postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial/appellate counsel and prosecutorial misconduct; the district court held an evidentiary hearing and then denied relief, and this Court affirmed.
Represented by new counsel, Jackson filed a second postconviction motion raising: claims that seven jury instructions were reversible error; ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; prosecutorial misconduct; appellate counsel conflict of interest; ineffective postconviction counsel; and alleged crime-lab misconduct by David Kofoed (claiming evidence planting/fabrication).
The district court denied the second motion as procedurally barred for most claims, concluded ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel is not a basis for relief, and found Jackson’s allegations about Kofoed insufficient to merit an evidentiary hearing.
On appeal Jackson challenged (1) procedural bar as to jury-instruction error, (2) procedural bar as to appellate counsel conflict of interest, and (3) denial of an evidentiary hearing on the crime-lab misconduct/tampering claim.
The Nebraska Supreme Court found it had jurisdiction, held the instruction and conflict claims were procedurally barred (could have been raised earlier), and held Jackson failed to allege sufficient facts to require an evidentiary hearing on the Kofoed allegation.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jackson could raise jury-instruction errors in a successive postconviction motion	Jackson: errors were not properly presented earlier due to postconviction counsel’s failure	State: claims were known and could have been raised earlier; successive motion barred	Procedurally barred; claim dismissed
Whether Jackson could raise appellate counsel conflict of interest in successive postconviction motion	Jackson: conflict existed and was not previously raised	State: claim could have been raised earlier and is procedurally barred	Procedurally barred; claim dismissed
Whether ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel can excuse procedural default	Jackson: relied on postconviction counsel’s negligence to explain failures in earlier filings	State: ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel is not a basis for relief	Court reaffirmed that ineffective postconviction counsel does not excuse procedural bar
Whether Jackson alleged sufficient facts to warrant an evidentiary hearing on alleged crime-lab evidence planting by Kofoed	Jackson: inconsistencies about blood on clothing, Kofoed had access to victim’s blood and history of fabrication, so hearing required	State: initial officer observed red-stain discolorations before Kofoed’s involvement and reports predate lab access; allegations are conclusory	Allegations insufficient and unlike prior cases granting hearings; no evidentiary hearing required

Key Cases Cited

State v. Hessler, 288 Neb. 670 (reaffirming that ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel is not a basis for postconviction relief)
State v. Cook, 290 Neb. 381 (alleging Kofoed’s involvement and history of fabrication alone is insufficient for postconviction relief)
State v. Edwards, 284 Neb. 382 (granted evidentiary hearing where allegations mirrored Kofoed’s prior unlawful conduct)
State v. Smith, 269 Neb. 773 (procedures governing extension of appeal time for official negligence)
State v. Ely, 295 Neb. 607 (addresses jurisdictional and finality principles referenced by the Court)