State v. McKethan
A-24-471
Neb. Ct. App.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Terran T. McKethan pled guilty in 2022 to four counts of first-degree sexual assault and one count of attempted child enticement, receiving consecutive sentences of 20-25 years per count.
- His plea was pursuant to a deal, which reduced potential exposure from charges carrying mandatory minimums and up to life imprisonment, to five class II felonies.
- On direct appeal, McKethan argued his trial counsel was ineffective and his sentence excessive; his claims were rejected by the Court of Appeals.
- In his postconviction motion, McKethan—acting pro se—alleged violations of due process, conflicts of interest surrounding the original trial judge, and ineffective assistance of both trial and appellate counsel.
- The district court denied postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, finding McKethan’s claims lacked factual support, were previously litigated, or could have been raised on direct appeal.
- McKethan appealed, asserting the district court abused its discretion by allowing rulings from a judge with a conflict of interest due to familial ties to a victim via the judge's bailiff.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict of Interest/Due Process | Judge's rulings invalid due to conflict of interest (judge’s bailiff related to victim) | Conflict claim is speculative, already reviewed, and there is no prejudice; claim could've been raised on direct appeal | Procedurally barred and/or meritless; no relief |
| Ineffective Assistance—Trial Counsel | Counsel failed to inform/investigate judicial conflict, speedy trial rights, and subpoena potential witness | No deficiency or prejudice; McKethan knowingly pled guilty; no objective evidence he’d go to trial | No ineffective assistance found; no prejudice demonstrated |
| Ineffective Assistance—Appellate Counsel | Appellate counsel failed to raise trial counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness and due process violations | Issues not properly assigned or argued; lack of factual support; no underlying trial counsel ineffectiveness | No relief; arguments waived/not properly preserved |
| Evidentiary Hearing | Factual disputes require a hearing | Claims are conclusory or already resolved; record shows no entitlement | Denial of hearing upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel claims)
- State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 (2022) (states standards for postconviction relief and evidentiary hearing requirements)
- State v. Blaha, 303 Neb. 415 (2019) (articulates prejudice standard for guilty pleas in ineffective assistance context)
- State v. Allen, 301 Neb. 560 (2018) (disallows postconviction review of issues previously litigated or that could have been raised on direct appeal)