State v. Vela, 297 Neb. 227

Background

Erick F. Vela pled guilty in 2003 to five murders and related felonies arising from a 2002 bank robbery; a three-judge panel imposed death sentences for each murder.
Vela’s direct appeal affirmed the convictions and sentences; same counsel represented him at trial and on direct appeal.
In 2014 Vela filed an amended postconviction motion alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; the district court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing.
This court vacated and remanded once for use of the correct standard; on remand the district court reconsidered and again denied postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing as to all claims now appealed.
On appeal Vela pressed six specific ineffective-assistance claims (timing of plea, juror–prosecutor relationship, failure to appeal Batson rulings, intellectual-functioning testing, failure to request malice instruction, and failure to present evidence negating malice) and sought consideration of an unraised Hurst-based capital-sentencing claim (which the Court declined to consider).

Issues

Issue	Vela's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Timing of plea (pre-Ring/LB1 and before discovery of Lundell body)	Counsel should have advised earlier guilty plea to avoid exposure to death penalty and prejudicial evidence discovered later	Earlier plea would not have avoided death exposure; speculative that counsel knew events (e.g., Lundell body) would occur	No deficient performance or prejudice; claim speculative and foreclosed by prior appellate holdings; denied
Prosecutor–juror relationship (pastoral relationship discovered late)	Counsel failed to investigate/strike juror and failed to seek new trial or appeal; relationship biased juror	Voir dire showed juror could be impartial; no showing counsel would have struck juror or that result would differ	No prejudice shown; trial court would not have abused discretion; claim denied
Failure to appeal Batson rulings	Appellate counsel should have raised Batson errors (prosecutor struck sole Hispanic and sole Black veniremembers)	Prosecutor gave race-neutral reasons accepted by trial court; no reasonable probability of success on appeal	No ineffective assistance of appellate counsel; failure to raise Batson would not likely change outcome; claim denied
Intellectual functioning testing / mental retardation evidence	Counsel prevented State expert from doing adaptive behavior testing; additional testing would have shown deficits precluding death	Record shows State expert did assess adaptive behavior by other means and found overall functioning appropriate	No prejudice: alternative testing occurred and expert concluded average adaptive functioning; claim denied
Failure to request malice definition for aggravator	Counsel should have requested malice definition and presented evidence to negate malice re: Lundell homicide	Aggravator § 29-2523(1)(a) concerns prior assaultive/terrorizing conduct, not mens rea degree; lesser homicide still supports aggravator	No prejudice: even without malice finding, evidence supports aggravator; panel likely would not have discounted weight; claim denied
Failure to present evidence negating malice (related)	Evidence of coercion/diminished intellect would negate malice and weaken aggravator	Even lesser homicide or culpability still supports the statutory prior-history aggravator	No prejudice shown; claim denied

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance + prejudice)
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (peremptory strikes may not be race-based)
Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (death-penalty factfinding and Sixth Amendment concerns)
Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (jury role in capital sentencing) (relied on by appellant but claim not preserved)
Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (standards for assessing intellectual disability in death-penalty cases)
State v. Vela, 279 Neb. 94 (direct-appeal decision affirming convictions and discussing adaptive behavior evidence)
State v. Galindo, 278 Neb. 599 (notice-of-aggravation and nonretroactivity of procedural change)
State v. Watson, 295 Neb. 802 (standard for entitlement to postconviction evidentiary hearing)