State v. Stricklin, 916 N.W.2d 413

Background

Derrick Stricklin was convicted by a jury of two counts of first‑degree murder and related weapon/offense counts arising from a shooting during a drug transaction; he received consecutive life and term sentences.
At trial the State relied heavily on eyewitness Jose Herrera‑Gutierrez and cell‑phone records linking codefendant Newman to the scene; Stricklin was tried jointly with Newman and had the same counsel at trial and on direct appeal.
This court previously affirmed the convictions on direct appeal. Stricklin then filed a verified postconviction motion alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and a claim of actual innocence.
The district court denied the postconviction motion without an evidentiary hearing; Stricklin appealed that denial.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed whether the postconviction motion alleged sufficient facts to require an evidentiary hearing and whether the record affirmatively refuted claims.
The court affirmed denial as to most claims but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing limited to two specific allegations: failure to present an alibi defense and failure to investigate two alternative suspects (Jefferson and Moore).

Issues

Issue	Stricklin's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether district court abused discretion by denying leave to amend postconviction motion	He sought leave to amend later by appointed counsel (placeholder)	Request was conditional and not a present attempt to amend	Denial not an abuse of discretion
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to seek recusal of trial judge	Counsel failed to move to recuse despite perceived favoritism toward prosecution	Allegations were conclusory; record shows admonition and no objective basis for recusal	No hearing required; claim refuted as meritless
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to present an alibi defense	Counsel knew of alibi witnesses and phone records that, if presented, would show Stricklin elsewhere during the relevant period	Record does not establish sufficiency of alibi; trial strategy may explain omission	Allegations adequate; remand for evidentiary hearing on this claim
Whether counsel failed to investigate alternative suspects Jefferson and Moore	Counsel ignored information indicating Moore or Jefferson had motive/knowledge and would have been identified as suspects	Allegations speculative for many witnesses; but claims about Jefferson and Moore sufficiently specific	Remand for evidentiary hearing limited to investigation of Jefferson and Moore
Whether counsel was ineffective regarding jury instructions, cell‑phone authentication, crime‑scene investigator, prosecutorial‑misconduct mistrial, and related claims	Stricklin asserted multiple instructional, evidentiary, and investigative failures	Many claims were previously litigated on direct appeal, speculative, or affirmatively refuted by the record	Court denied evidentiary hearings on these claims as either procedurally barred, meritless, or conclusory
Whether Stricklin established actual innocence to warrant relief	Contended trial evidence was untrustworthy and ineffective assistance claims support actual innocence	Threshold for actual‑innocence hearing is very high; allegations attack weight, not new exculpatory proof	Denied; allegations insufficient to meet extraordinary threshold

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Newman, 290 Neb. 572 (Neb. 2015) (resolving similar postconviction claims by codefendant; instructional and cell‑phone evidence analysis)
State v. Stricklin, 290 Neb. 542 (Neb. 2015) (direct‑appeal opinion affirming convictions; admissibility of Newman’s cell‑phone records)
State v. Vela, 297 Neb. 227 (Neb. 2017) (postconviction relief standards; motion pleading and evidentiary hearing requirements)
State v. McKinney, 279 Neb. 297 (Neb. 2010) (same‑counsel rule: first opportunity to raise ineffective assistance is postconviction)
State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149 (Neb. 2015) (postconviction standards: when hearing required)
State v. Dubray, 294 Neb. 937 (Neb. 2016) (high threshold for actual‑innocence postconviction hearings)