State v. Wheeler
308 Neb. 708
| Neb. | 2021Background
- Defendant Marcus R. Wheeler was charged with first-degree murder and use of a firearm after a group confrontation that culminated in a shooting in a Walmart parking lot; victim Kayviaun Nelson died of two gunshot wounds.
- Seven shell casings were recovered at the scene; no firearm or bullets were recovered from the victim or vehicle.
- The State called Angela Harder, an Omaha PD firearm/toolmark examiner, who opined that all seven casings were fired from the same gun; defense raised a motion in limine to exclude her testimony and relied on the PCAST report to challenge toolmark methodology and her qualifications.
- The district court held a voir dire hearing, admitted the PCAST report for the hearing, found Harder qualified based on training, experience, and proficiency testing, and overruled the motion in limine and later trial objections.
- The jury acquitted Wheeler of first-degree murder but convicted him of the lesser-included offense of second-degree murder and of use of a firearm to commit a felony; the court sentenced Wheeler to 70–100 years (murder) plus 7–15 years (firearm), to run consecutively.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Wheeler's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility — expert qualification (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-702) | Harder had sufficient training, experience, and ongoing proficiency testing to qualify as a firearms/toolmark expert. | Harder lacked formal coursework, AFTE certification, and adequate training to be an expert. | Court: No abuse of discretion; Harder qualified based on experience, training, and proficiency testing. |
| Admissibility — unfair prejudice (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-403) | Harder’s opinion on the tested casings was probative and limited; any weight issues go to the jury. | Her testimony was unduly prejudicial because it supported the State’s one-gun theory and foreclosed defense theory of another shooter. | Court: Probative value outweighed prejudice; testimony limited to tested casings and admissible. |
| Sufficiency of evidence — identity of shooter / causation | Eyewitnesses placed Wheeler with a gun, saw him on driver’s side when shots were fired, and Harder tied casings to one gun; jurors could infer Wheeler fired fatal shots. | Evidence was insufficient to connect Wheeler’s shots to those that killed Nelson; defense witness contradicted shooter identity and placement. | Court: Viewing evidence most favorably to the State, rational juror could find Wheeler fired the fatal shots and reject self-defense. |
| Sentencing — excessive / mitigation considered | Court considered mitigating factors (including youth) but properly weighed nature and violence of offense and public safety. | Court failed to give adequate weight to Wheeler’s age and other mitigating factors; sentence tailored to crime not offender. | Court: No abuse of discretion; sentencing within statutory limits and court expressly considered age and other mitigators. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reiber v. County of Gage, 303 Neb. 325 (2019) (standards for admitting expert scientific testimony)
- State v. Grant, 293 Neb. 163 (2016) (review of trial court’s expert-admissibility decisions)
- State v. Braesch, 292 Neb. 930 (2016) (expert qualification and methodology requirements)
- State v. Daly, 278 Neb. 903 (2009) (trial court discretion on expert qualifications)
- State v. Price, 306 Neb. 38 (2020) (standard for sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases)
- State v. Senteney, 307 Neb. 702 (2020) (appellate review of sentences within statutory limits)
- State v. Gray, 307 Neb. 418 (2020) (sentence should fit the offender as well as the crime)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (juvenile sentencing Eighth Amendment considerations)