Legal Opinion

State v. Russell

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1992No. 90-429PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHastings, C.J.

Defendant, Earl C. Russell, appeals from the order denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his motion for postconviction relief brought in the district court pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-3001 etseq. (Reissue 1989). We affirm.

In an appeal of a postconviction proceeding, “the findings of the district court will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous.” State v. Blank, ante p. 188, 190, 474 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1991). Additionally:

“ ‘A court is not required to grant an evidential hearing on a motion for postconviction relief which alleges only conclusions of law or fact; nor is an…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. HaynieNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State v. OteyNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
  3. State v. RehbeinNebraska Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Bert Cattle Co., Inc. v. WarrenNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. SchollNebraska Supreme Court · 1988

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. HaynesNebraska Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State v. NielsenNebraska Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. DeanNebraska Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State v. BoppreNebraska Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. LymanNebraska Supreme Court · 1992

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API