S-24-504 State of Nebraska (Appellee) v. Brent P. Lopez (Appellant)
Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County, Judge Kevin R. McManaman
Attorneys: Kristi Egger and Amanda Baskin (Lancaster County Public Defender’s Office for Appellant) and Jacob M. Waggoner (Asst. Attorney General for Appellee)
Criminal: Two counts of Attempted Assault in the First Degree; two counts of Use of a Firearm to Commit a Felony; Self-defense jury instruction
Proceedings below: Appellant pled no contest to two counts of third-degree assault, but he went to trial on the remaining counts. The district court refused to give a self-defense jury instruction, and the jury found Appellant guilty of two counts of attempted first-degree assault and two counts of use of a firearm to commit a felony. Appellant was given an aggregate sentence of twenty-five (25) to forty-two (42) years in prison. On its own motion, the Nebraska Supreme Court ordered this case to be transferred from the docket of the Nebraska Court of Appeals to its docket.
Issues: Appellant assigns the following errors: 1) The district court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense of others: 2) The sentences imposed by the district court are excessive and constitute an abuse of discretion; 3) Appellant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel under the United States and Nebraska Constitutions due to trial counsel’s deficiency in failing to obtain exculpatory evidence regarding the Rec Center incident; 4) Appellant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel under the United States and Nebraska Constitutions due to trial counsel’s deficiency in failing to adequately prepare Appellant to testify and advising him not to testify; 5) Appellant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel under the United States and Nebraska Constitutions due to trial counsel’s deficiency in failing to adequately investigate DHHS policy; and 6) Appellant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel under the United States and Nebraska Constitutions due to trial counsel’s deficiency in failing to retain an expert to rebut the State’s claim that Appellant was suffering from self-induced paranoia.