Opinion ID: 1915884
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: Failure to Object to Statements From Warren, Robert Sklenar, Tony Bass, and Paylor

Text: Harris contends that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing because (1) Warren stated without objection that for his personal safety, he would get to move to another state while on parole; (2) Robert Sklenar, an Omaha police detective, testified that he spoke to Harris about this case and another case, and no § 27-404(2) objection was made; (3) Bass testified without objection that Harris told him about the murder and other things such as drug dealing by Bass; and (4) Paylor, who allegedly had been shot by Harris in the past, testified without proper objection that he met with Harris so Harris could let [Paylor] know who had shot Paylor. On direct appeal, we determined that even if a proper objection would have been made to the testimony, no basis exists for reversal on each of the above issues. We apply the same reasoning and conclude that Harris is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on this issue. See State v. Harris, 263 Neb. 331, 640 N.W.2d 24 (2002).