State v. Russell, 954 N.W.2d 920

Stephen Russell pled no contest to second-degree murder under a plea agreement and was sentenced to 60–70 years' imprisonment; no direct appeal was filed.
Russell filed an amended motion for postconviction relief seeking a new direct appeal, alleging trial counsel failed to file an appeal despite Russell’s requests (voicemail and a notarized letter).
At the evidentiary hearing the court received depositions: Russell testified he learned of the 30‑day appeal right after sentencing and attempted to contact counsel; counsel testified he did not recall any contact and does not routinely discuss appeals unless asked.
The district court noted the plea colloquy advised Russell of the right to appeal (but not the 30‑day deadline) and found Russell’s deposition testimony not credible due to lack of supporting evidence (no call logs, no proof the letter was mailed).
The district court denied postconviction relief; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, concluding Russell failed to prove he directed counsel to file an appeal and therefore counsel was not deficient.

Issue	Russell's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a direct appeal after Russell requested one	Russell says he asked counsel (voicemail + notarized letter) to file a direct appeal within 30 days	Counsel says he received no call or letter; court record shows no proof of contact; Russell had the burden to prove he directed an appeal	Court held Russell failed to prove he directed an appeal; counsel not deficient; relief denied
Whether counsel was ineffective for not advising Russell of the 30‑day appeal deadline	Russell argues counsel didn’t advise him of appellate deadlines	State notes Russell learned of the right to appeal from others and had actual knowledge, so lack of advisement did not prejudice him	Court held no prejudice from lack of advisement because Russell had actual knowledge; claim focused properly on alleged failure to file

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Roe v. Flores‑Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000) (reasonableness inquiry on counsel's duty to consult about appeals; prejudice presumed if defendant directed appeal)
Peguero v. United States, 526 U.S. 23 (1999) (no prejudice where defendant had actual knowledge of appeal right but did not request counsel to file)
State v. Dalton, 307 Neb. 465, 949 N.W.2d 752 (2020) (postconviction relief is narrow; standards for ineffective assistance claims)
State v. Weathers, 304 Neb. 402, 935 N.W.2d 185 (2019) (burden to obtain new direct appeal via postconviction relief)
State v. Trotter, 259 Neb. 212, 609 N.W.2d 33 (2000) (presumption of prejudice when counsel fails to file appeal after defendant directs counsel to do so)
Burgardt v. Burgardt, 304 Neb. 356, 934 N.W.2d 488 (2019) (trier of fact may discredit self‑serving testimony lacking corroboration)