State v. Stabler
940 N.W.2d 572
Neb.2020Background
- Stabler, recently separated from his wife Jacinda, exchanged electronic messages with Athea arranging an assault on Jacinda for payment (cash and meth).
- Athea traveled to Lincoln, accepted a knife from Stabler, entered Jacinda’s home, and stabbed Jacinda after confronting her; Athea later admitted the attack and was convicted.
- Messages and testimony indicated Stabler solicited, supplied a weapon to, and promised payment to Athea; some messages were deleted but others were admitted at trial.
- Stabler was tried and convicted by a jury of second degree assault and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony (aiding and abetting theory).
- He was sentenced to consecutive terms totaling 15 to 25 years’ imprisonment and appealed, raising five assignments of error.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed on all issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Stabler) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether rebuttal remarks shifted burden and whether a limiting instruction was required | State: remarks were stricken and the court later instructed jury; no burden shift | Stabler: rebuttal suggested defendant could compel witnesses; requested limiting instruction and claimed burden shifted | Court: no reversible error — remarks stricken and jury was instructed that State bears burden; no prejudice |
| Admissibility of testimony about nature of prior felony convictions | State: impeachment by prior convictions limited by §27-609; specifics not required | Stabler: sought to testify the felonies were forgery (not violent) to avoid juror speculation | Court: no error — Stabler was allowed to say convictions involved dishonesty; specifics unnecessary and not admitted |
| Whether court erred by refusing lesser-included (third-degree assault) instruction | State: evidence uncontroverted that assailant brought/used a knife; no rational basis for lesser instruction | Stabler: Athea hesitated on seeing children, initially punched not stabbed, creating causal break warranting lesser instruction | Court: no error — uncontroverted evidence of weapon use; no causal break; lesser instruction not warranted |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support convictions | State: Athea’s testimony, messages, knife transfer, and payment arrangement support aiding and abetting convictions | Stabler: Athea not credible and subsequent conduct was autonomous, negating his liability | Court: evidence sufficient when viewed in State’s favor; credibility and conflicts for jury to resolve |
| Whether sentences were excessive | State: sentences within statutory limits and based on relevant sentencing factors | Stabler: sentences excessive given circumstances | Court: no abuse of discretion; sentences within statutory limits and appropriately imposed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716 (2017) (discusses law governing jury instructions)
- State v. Case, 304 Neb. 829 (2020) (standards for appellate review in criminal cases)
- State v. Iddings, 304 Neb. 759 (2020) (principles governing sentencing review)
- State v. Oliveira-Coutinho, 304 Neb. 147 (2019) (test for when lesser-included instruction is required)
- State v. Al-Zubaidy, 263 Neb. 595 (2002) (lesser-offense instruction not warranted when prosecution offers uncontroverted evidence on an element)
- State v. Howell, 26 Neb. App. 842 (2019) (limitations on testifying to specifics of prior convictions for impeachment)