State v. Lessley
301 Neb. 734
Neb.2018Background
- In the early morning of Oct. 29, 2016, an armed intruder entered the Omaha home of Suzanne Pope and Curtis Goodwin; Pope was shot and killed, Goodwin was shot and severely injured. ShotSpotter and neighbors corroborated two shots and a dark Suburban/Tahoe leaving the scene.
- Goodwin testified the intruder demanded money, took his laptop, and was struck by Goodwin with a bat during a struggle. Multiple bullets recovered were fired from the same firearm.
- DNA matching Tyeric Lessley was found on blood and on a bat at the scene; a shoeprint on the stolen laptop matched Nike Shox shoes Lessley wore at arrest. GPS data placed a 2001 green Suburban purchased by Lessley near the residence shortly before the shooting.
- The State charged Lessley with first degree murder (premeditated or felony-murder theories), first degree assault, two counts of use of a weapon to commit a felony, and possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited person. The premeditation theory was dropped and trial proceeded on felony murder only.
- The jury convicted on all counts. The district court pronounced life for felony murder, consecutive terms for assault and other counts, then attempted to modify some nonlife sentences by adding 1 day to maximums; on appeal the court affirmed convictions and some sentences but vacated and remanded certain nonlife sentences for conformity with valid pronouncements.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Lessley’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for convictions | Evidence (victim testimony, matching bullets, DNA on bat/driveway, shoeprint, GPS, vehicle match) supports robbery/attempted robbery and identification of Lessley as perpetrator | Evidence conflicted and was circumstantial; DNA presence not definitively tied to time/place; inconsistencies create reasonable doubt | Convictions affirmed — viewing evidence in prosecution’s light, a rational juror could find elements beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Duty to instruct manslaughter as lesser-included offense | When murder is charged solely as felony murder, lesser homicide instructions are not required; even if required, no adequate evidence of sudden quarrel/heat of passion here | Trial court erred by failing to instruct on manslaughter given evidence of a struggle and possible provocation | No error — felony-murder theory obviated duty to instruct, and in any event evidence insufficient to support manslaughter instruction |
| Validity/modification of nonlife sentences (use & possession counts; assault) | Original identical min/max terms for nonlife counts were valid under sentencing statutes for minimums equal to statutory minima; attempted postpronouncement additions were ineffective except where original sentence invalid | District court improperly modified pronounced nonlife sentences after they took effect; some sentences invalid and required correction | Affirmed life and assault sentences; vacated/ remanded the use and possession sentences to reflect the court’s originally pronounced (valid) terms; assault sentence modified where original min equaled max and violated statute |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McCurdy, 918 N.W.2d 292 (Neb. 2018) (standard for sufficiency review)
- State v. Wells, 912 N.W.2d 896 (Neb. 2018) (instruction and sufficiency principles)
- State v. Smith, 822 N.W.2d 401 (Neb. 2012) (requirements for manslaughter instruction; sudden quarrel/heat of passion)
- State v. Schroeder, 777 N.W.2d 793 (Neb. 2010) (distinction re: felony murder and intent)
- State v. Masters, 524 N.W.2d 342 (Neb. 1994) (felony-murder instruction principles)
- State v. McDonald, 240 N.W.2d 8 (Neb. 1976) (mens rea distinction in felony murder)
- State v. Schnabel, 618 N.W.2d 699 (Neb. 2000) (limits on modifying pronounced sentences)
- State v. Vanness, 912 N.W.2d 736 (Neb. 2018) (sentencing conformity and correction principles)