State v. Smith

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1972

Nebraska Supreme Court · decided 1972-04-27

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1979

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“This, however, is a second motion for post conviction relief on behalf of the defendant. In State v. Reichel, 187 Neb. 464 , 191 N.W.2d 826 , we held: “After a first motion for post conviction relief has been judicially determined, any subsequent motion for post conviction relief from the same conviction and sentence may be dismissed by the district court, unless the motion affirmatively shows on its face that the basis relied upon for relief was not available at the time of filing a prior motion for post conviction relief.” We see no reason to depart from that holding in this case.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Smith v. Wolff

Relies on State v. Reichel

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1972-04-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Spencer, J.

¶1 This is a post conviction action to vacate and set aside defendant’s sentence and conviction for first degree murder. Defendant pled guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment. The trial court appointed counsel, *389 granted defendant a hearing, and decided the case on its merits.

¶2 This, however, is a second motion for post conviction relief on behalf of the defendant. In State v. Reichel, 187 Neb. 464, 191 N. W. 2d 826, we held: “After a first motion for post conviction relief has been judicially determined, any subsequent motion for post conviction relief from the same conviction and sentence may be dismissed by the district court, unless the motion affirmatively shows on its face that the basis relied upon for relief was not available at the time of filing a prior motion for post conviction relief.” We see no reason to depart from that holding in this case.

¶3 The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

¶4 Affirmed.