State v. Figures

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

State v. Figures

Additional Case Names

(20)

9:00am

Case Number
S-19-1210
Call Date
March 5, 2021
Case Time
9:00 AM
Court Number
Douglas
Case Location
Lincoln
Court Type
District Court
Case Summary

S-19-1210 State of Nebraska v. Phillip P. Figures (Appellant)

Douglas County District Court, Hon. Thomas A. Otepka

Attorneys: Peder Bartling (Bartling Law Offices, PC LLO, for Appellant); Austin N. Relph (Office of the Attorney General, for Appellee)

Criminal: First degree murder; Ineffective assistance of counsel

Proceedings Below: On August 29, 2019, a jury found the Appellant guilty of murder in the first degree and use of a weapon (firearm) to commit a felony, and thereafter, the district court accepted and entered the jury’s verdicts. On November 25, 2019, Appellant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment with respect to the homicide count and a term of forty to fifty years imprisonment with respect to the firearm count, with the sentences to run consecutively.

Issue on Appeal: Whether 1) the district court abused its discretion and violated Appellant’s Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel by denying his requests for appointment of successor trial counsel and, correspondingly, by denying Appellant’s trial counsel’s motions to withdraw; 2) the district court abused its discretion and violated Appellant’s due process rights by denying Appellant’s request to review discovery material; 3) the district court abused its discretion by allowing the State to introduce improper evidence during its case-in-chief in violation of § 27-404; 4) the district court abused its discretion by sustaining the State’s motion to dismiss the jury’s only African American juror; 5) the district court violated Appellant’s constitutional right to due process and a fair trial by allowing the State to present a portion of its case-in-chief in Appellant’s absence; 6) the district court erred by permitting the State to introduce hearsay testimony over trial counsel’s objections; 7) the district court erred by denying Appellant’s motion for mistrial; 8) there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find the State had established that Appellant had violated §§ 28-303 and 28-1205; 9) the accumulation of errors in Appellant’s case are such that if any one error does not require reversal, the aggregation of errors requires the reviewing appellate court to reverse Appellant’s convictions and remand the matter for a new trial; and 10) Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Schedule Code
SC