State v. Thomas

Case Number(s)
S-21-0551
Case Audio
Call Date
Case Time
Court Number
Lancaster
Case Location
Lincoln
Court Type
District Court
Case Summary

S-21-0551, State (Appellee) v. Rubin J. Thomas (Appellant)

Appeal from the District Court of Lancaster County, Judge Susan Strong

Attorneys: Christopher Eickholt (Eickholt Law, LLC) for Appellant and Erin Tangeman (Attorney General’s Office) for Appellee. 

Criminal:  Appointment of counsel, bond setting, sentencing, and ineffective assistance of counsel, conspiracy to commit robbery, conspiracy to commit burglary

Proceedings below: Appellant was convicted and sentenced to not less than 26 years but not more than 32 years on the Conspiracy to Commit Robbery charge and not less than 14 years and not more than 20 years on the Conspiracy to Commit Burglary charge.  The district court ordered that the sentences be served consecutively. 

Issues:  Appellant argues that: 1) the district court erred in not permitting trial counsel to withdraw from representing him, despite his specific and repeated requests that trial counsel withdraw; 2) trial counsel was ineffective for permitting the district court to conduct an off-the-record hearing on Appellant’s motion to discharge trial counsel; 3) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to withdraw from representing Appellant, despite Appellant’s specific and repeated requests that trial counsel withdraw; 4) the district court erred by revoking Appellant’s bond; 5) the district court erred by failing to be fair and impartial when it prejudicially revoked the bond after concluding, weeks before sentencing, that it would be imposing a significant sentence of incarceration in this case, despite not fully reviewing the case file, the PSI, or the necessary statutory factors to be considered for sentencing; 6) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to have the district court judge recuse itself when it revoked Appellant’s bond to prevent him from posting his bond because the judge had already decided to impose a significant sentence of imprisonment; 7) the sentence imposed was excessive and constituted an abuse of discretion; and 8) Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Schedule Code
SC