State v. St. Cyr

26 Neb. Ct. App. 61
CourtNebraska Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 3, 2018
DocketA-17-372
StatusPublished

This text of 26 Neb. Ct. App. 61 (State v. St. Cyr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. St. Cyr, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 61 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 07/10/2018 08:10 AM CDT

- 61 - Nebraska Court of A ppeals A dvance Sheets 26 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. ST. CYR Cite as 26 Neb. App. 61

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Luke A. St. Cyr, appellant. ___ N.W.2d ___

Filed July 3, 2018. No. A-17-372.

1. Sentences: Appeal and Error. An appellate court will not disturb a sen- tence imposed within the statutory limits absent an abuse of discretion by the trial court. 2. Effectiveness of Counsel: Appeal and Error. Whether a claim of inef- fective assistance of trial counsel may be determined on direct appeal is a question of law. 3. ____: ____. In reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, an appellate court decides only questions of law: Are the undisputed facts contained within the record sufficient to conclusively determine whether counsel did or did not provide effective assistance and whether the defendant was or was not prejudiced by counsel’s alleged deficient performance? 4. Sentences: Appeal and Error. Where a sentence imposed within the statutory limits is alleged on appeal to be excessive, the appellate court must determine whether the sentencing court abused its discretion in considering and applying the relevant factors as well as any applicable legal principles in determining the sentence to be imposed. 5. Sentences. When imposing a sentence, the sentencing judge should consider the defendant’s (1) age, (2) mentality, (3) education and expe- rience, (4) social and cultural background, (5) past criminal record or record of law-abiding conduct, and (6) motivation for the offense, as well as (7) the nature of the offense and (8) the violence involved in the commission of the offense. 6. ____. The appropriateness of a sentence is necessarily a subjective judg- ment and includes the sentencing judge’s observation of the defendant’s demeanor and attitude and all the facts and circumstances surrounding the defendant’s life. - 62 - Nebraska Court of A ppeals A dvance Sheets 26 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. ST. CYR Cite as 26 Neb. App. 61

7. Criminal Law: Restitution: Damages. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2280 (Reissue 2016) vests trial courts with the authority to order restitu- tion for actual damages sustained by the victim of a crime for which a defend­ant is convicted. 8. Sentences: Restitution: Damages. After the sentencing court deter- mines that a conviction warrants restitution, it then becomes the sentenc- ing court’s factfinding responsibility to determine the victim’s actual damages and the defendant’s ability to pay. 9. Effectiveness of Counsel: Appeal and Error. When a defendant’s trial counsel is different from his or her counsel on direct appeal, the defend­ ant must raise on direct appeal any issue of trial counsel’s ineffective performance which is known to the defendant or is apparent from the record. Otherwise, the issue will be procedurally barred. 10. Effectiveness of Counsel: Proof. To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984), the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that this deficient performance actually prejudiced his or her defense. 11. Effectiveness of Counsel: Pleas: Proof. To show prejudice when the alleged ineffective assistance relates to the entry of a plea, the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he or she would not have entered the plea and would have insisted on going to trial. 12. Effectiveness of Counsel: Proof. The two prongs of the ineffective assistance test under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984), deficient performance and prejudice, may be addressed in either order. 13. Effectiveness of Counsel: Sentences. Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 29-2261 and 29-2204.03 (Reissue 2016) give the court the discretion to order further evaluations of the defendant prior to sentencing when it deems such evaluations necessary for determining the sentence to be imposed; neither statute provides that a defendant can or should request the evaluations. Trial counsel cannot be deficient for failing to request evaluations that the court itself could have ordered, but in its discretion deemed unnecessary.

Appeal from the District Court for Madison County: James G. Kube, Judge. Affirmed in part, sentence of restitution vacated, and cause remanded with directions. Ryan J. Stover, of Stratton, DeLay, Doele, Carlson & Buettner, P.C., L.L.O., for appellant. - 63 - Nebraska Court of A ppeals A dvance Sheets 26 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. ST. CYR Cite as 26 Neb. App. 61

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Kimberly A. Klein for appellee. Moore, Chief Judge, and Bishop and A rterburn, Judges. Bishop, Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Luke A. St. Cyr pled guilty to one count of first degree assault pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-308 (Reissue 2016), and the district court for Madison County sentenced him to 40 to 50 years’ imprisonment and ordered him to pay $100,000 in restitution. St. Cyr argues that his sentence is excessive and that his counsel was ineffective. For the following rea- sons, we affirm in part, but because we find the court did not meaningfully consider St. Cyr’s ability to pay restitution, we vacate the sentence of restitution and remand the cause with directions. II. BACKGROUND On December 13, 2016, the State filed an information charg- ing St. Cyr with first degree assault pursuant to § 28-308, a Class II felony. The offense was alleged to have occurred on October 28. On January 30, 2017, pursuant to a plea agreement, St. Cyr pled guilty to the charge in the information in exchange for the State’s agreement to not file additional charges arising from the incident. The factual basis was derived from statements by St. Cyr, his attorney, and the State. St. Cyr’s counsel said that after a “brief verbal altercation,” St. Cyr “punched the victim several times, knocked the victim out and then [St. Cyr] pro- ceeded to kick the victim several times in the head and cause serious bodily injury.” St. Cyr told the court that “I punched him and I kicked him and I assaulted him.” The State added that the police responded to a call at a bar in Norfolk, Madison County, Nebraska. They found the victim bleeding, unable to talk, and unable to get up. The victim was taken to a hospi- tal, and - 64 - Nebraska Court of A ppeals A dvance Sheets 26 Nebraska A ppellate R eports STATE v. ST. CYR Cite as 26 Neb. App. 61

the doctors that continued to treat the victim would have indicated and testified that the injuries sustained by the victim fit the definition of serious bodily injury because there was a substantial risk from the injuries that . . . the victim may have died and it required . . . medical inter- vention to keep him alive. The State said there was a videotape, and the evidence would show that the victim did nothing wrong and that there was nothing that would justify the use of force against the victim. The district court accepted St. Cyr’s guilty plea to the infor- mation and later sentenced him to 40 to 50 years’ imprison- ment, with 111 days’ credit for time served. The court also ordered him to pay restitution in the amount of $100,000. St. Cyr appeals. III. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR St.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
State v. Holecek
621 N.W.2d 100 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2000)
State v. Sellers
777 N.W.2d 779 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2010)
State v. Abdullah
289 Neb. 123 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2014)
State v. Casares
291 Neb. 150 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2015)
State v. Chacon
296 Neb. 203 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2017)
State v. Loding
296 Neb. 670 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2017)
State v. Dyer
298 Neb. 82 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2017)
State v. Stone
298 Neb. 53 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2017)
State v. Kidder
299 Neb. 232 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2018)
State v. St. Cyr
26 Neb. Ct. App. 61 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Neb. Ct. App. 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-st-cyr-nebctapp-2018.