State v. Burries (20)

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

State v. Burries (20)

Case Number
S-15-1008
Call Date
December 5, 2016
Court Number
Douglas
Case Summary

S-15-1008 State v. Anthony L. Burries (Appellant)

District Court of Douglas County, Honorable J. Russell Derr

Attorneys: Stacy M. Foust (Attorney General's Office) --- Michael J. Wilson & Glenn Shapiro (Schafer Shapiro, LLP) (Appellant)

Criminal: 1st degree murder

Proceedings below: Following a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of 1st degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Issues: 1) The trial court committed reversible error when, pursuant to Nebraska Evidence Rule

404(2) and as part of the "res gestae" of the charged offense, it allowed the State to introduce inadmissible propensity evidence in the form of a 2012 assault and threats toward Hoult, 2) in the alternative, the trial court committed reversible error when it admitted the evidence listed in Section l, supra, because the evidence constituted hearsay, lacked proper foundation, was irrelevant, and/or violated Rule 403, 3) trial counsel provided ineffective assistance when he failed to file a motion to suppress Appellant's statements where the recording demonstrated that he did not understand his constitutional right to a court-appointed attorney, 4) in the alternative, the trial court's finding that Appellant's statements to police were voluntary constituted reversible error, 5) trial counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when he failed to object to irrelevant DNA evidence and exacerbated the likely confusion of the jury by eliciting testimony that Appellant could have been the contributor, 6) the trial court committed reversible error when it admitted Appellant's August, 2015 letter to Harmony Howard because the letter did not meet the requirements of Rule 403 or Rule 404, 7) trial Counsel provided prejudicial ineffective assistance when he failed to renew at trial his objection to the certified copy of Appellant's conviction, and 8) Appellant received prejudicial ineffective assistance when trial counsel failed to adequately investigate and present several aspects of Appellant's defense.