State v. Smith
286 Neb. 77
| Neb. | 2013Background
- Smith was convicted of second-degree murder and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony in 2003 and sentenced to concurrent prison terms.
- The Nebraska Legislature amended the Postconviction Act in 2011 to create a 1-year filing period running from August 27, 2011 or the judgment finality date, whichever is later.
- Smith filed a pro se postconviction motion around August 24–28, 2012, claiming timely filing under the prison delivery rule.
- The district court held the 1-year period expired August 27, 2012, and the motion filed August 28, 2012 was untimely under § 29-3001(4).
- Nebraska law rejects the prison delivery rule for postconviction actions, following Parmar; the filing date is controlled by clerk stamping, not mailing date.
- The court affirmed the district court’s denial of postconviction relief, holding the record shows no timely filing and no entitlement to relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Smith timely filed under §29‑3001(4). | Smith. | State. | No; the 1-year period ran to Aug 27, 2012, and stamping on Aug 28, 2012 was untimely. |
| Whether the prison delivery rule applies to postconviction actions. | Smith. | State. | Not adopted; Nebraska does not apply the prison delivery rule to postconviction relief. |
| Whether §49‑1201 applies to postconviction actions. | Smith. | State. | Inapplicable; §49‑1201 pertains to tax matters, not postconviction motions. |
| Standard of review for postconviction denial without an evidentiary hearing. | Smith. | State. | Affirmed; no evidentiary hearing required where record shows entitlement to no relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Watkins v. Watkins, 285 Neb. 693, 829 N.W.2d 643 (2013) (statutory interpretation is a question of law)
- State v. Robinson, 285 Neb. 394, 827 N.W.2d 292 (2013) (clear‑error standard for findings in postconviction)
- Licht v. Association Servs., Inc., 236 Neb. 616, 463 N.W.2d 566 (1990) (1-year period treated as calendar year; last-day anniversary rule)
- State v. Hess, 261 Neb. 368, 622 N.W.2d 891 (2001) (best evidence of filing date; presumption of correctness)
- State v. Parmar, 255 Neb. 356, 586 N.W.2d 279 (1998) (Nebraska disapproved prison delivery rule for postconviction)
- Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prison mailbox filing rule for notices)