Oral Arguments are happening now. View them on the web or via Mobile App on iPhone / iPad or Android (4.0+).

You are here

State v. Sandoval

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Date: 
Wednesday, February 5, 2014

S-11-0872, State v. Jose Luis Sandoval (Appellant)

Dakota County, Judge Paul J. Vaughn

Attorneys: Joshua W. Weir (Dornan Lustgarten & Troia PCLLO) (Appellant) --- J. Kirk Brown (Senior Assistant Attorney General)

Criminal: Withdrawal of plea; Writ of Error Coram Nobis

Proceedings below: The trial court denied Appellant’s motion to withdraw plea fiding the Writ was not an appropriate remedy and found Appellant had not shown he faced any immigration consequences due to failure of the trial court to provide the advisements required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1819.02. Appellee filed a Motion for Summary Affirmance which was overruled. In the order, the Nebraska Supreme Court directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the following issues:

(1) Whether there is any basis for relief in the form of writ of error coram nobis on the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, in light of Chaidez v. U.S., ____U.S. ____, 133 S. Ct. 1103, 185 L.Ed.2d 149 (2013), and State v. Diaz, 283 Neb. 414, 808 N.W.2d 891 (2012), decided during the pendency of this appeal? (2) Whether the remedy set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29 -1819.02(2) (Reissue 2008) (a) may be utilized by a defendant who has completed his or her sentence; and if so, (b) whether such remedy may be asserted in a petition for writ of error coram nobis?

This page was last modified on Thursday, February 6, 2014