State v. Oliveira-Coutinho, 304 Neb. 147

Background

Oliveira-Coutinho was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder and one count of theft by deception; sentences include three life terms and 20 years. Convictions affirmed on direct appeal (State v. Oliveira-Coutinho).
He filed a pro se postconviction motion (and an amended motion) asserting ~50 claims, principally alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel (same attorneys) and some prosecutorial misconduct before counsel was appointed.
The district court denied the amended motion without an evidentiary hearing and denied appointment of postconviction counsel, concluding claims were insufficiently pleaded, procedurally barred, or refuted by the trial record.
Key contested topics included counsel’s handling of (a) competency challenges to codefendant Goncalves‑Santos, (b) jury and felony‑murder/aiding‑and‑abetting instructions, (c) failure to preserve/raise issues on appeal, (d) alleged failure to investigate, and (e) the role of an attorney (Kahler) who consulted with Oliveira‑Coutinho before charges were filed.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed: it applied Strickland standards, held many claims either legally without merit or factually refuted by the record, and found Oliveira‑Coutinho failed to adequately plead prejudice on several claims.

Issues

Issue	Oliveira‑Coutinho's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether district court erred by denying evidentiary hearing on postconviction claims	His amended motion alleged multiple constitutionally deficient acts by trial/appellate counsel meriting an evidentiary hearing	Many claims are conclusory, procedurally barred, or refuted by the record; no factual allegations showing prejudice	Denied: court properly refused hearing where claims were inadequately pleaded or contradicted by the record
Competency challenge to codefendant Goncalves‑Santos	Counsel should have sought a competency evaluation and barred his testimony	Record shows court considered competency‑related questioning; no legal basis to require psychiatric evaluation; trial court found witness competent	Denied: competency claims fail as there is no rule requiring psychiatric evaluation and record refutes incompetence
Aiding‑and‑abetting / felony‑murder instruction and notice	Instruction and §28‑206 deprived him of notice; counsel failed to advise he faced aiding‑and‑abetting theory	Charging information gives notice; precedent allows aiding‑and‑abetting instruction where evidence supports it; statutory challenge unsupported	Denied: instruction and statutory application proper; counsel not ineffective for failing to raise unmeritorious argument
Role of attorney Kahler during pre‑charge interview (alleged State agent)	Kahler was effectively a prosecution agent who induced a confession and relayed trial strategy to prosecutors	Kahler advised defendant, met privately with him, advised against statements, defendant chose to speak; suppression hearing testimony refutes agency/disclosure claims	Denied: record from suppression hearing refutes allegation Kahler acted as State agent or disclosed trial strategy
Denial of appointment of postconviction counsel	Requested appointment because of case complexity and his illiteracy	Appointment is discretionary; when petition has no justiciable issues, denial is not abuse of discretion	Denied: court did not abuse discretion where claims were procedurally barred or without merit

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong ineffective assistance standard)
State v. Oliveira‑Coutinho, 291 Neb. 294 (direct appeal affirming convictions and resolving related trial issues)
State v. Martinez, 302 Neb. 526 (postconviction hearing standards; when evidentiary hearing required)
State v. Taylor, 300 Neb. 629 (standards for appointment of postconviction counsel; Strickland framing)
State v. Privett, 303 Neb. 404 (standard of review in postconviction proceedings)
State v. Stark, 272 Neb. 89 (an information gives notice that aiding and abetting may be prosecuted)
State v. Contreras, 268 Neb. 797 (aiding and abetting instruction proper when supported by evidence)
State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716 (lesser‑included offense instruction standard)
State v. Sanders, 289 Neb. 335 (failure to raise novel legal theories is not ineffective assistance)
Garcia v. State, 159 Neb. 571 (competency of witness limited to capacity to understand oath and answer questions)