Opinion ID: 2038810
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: statement to jury

Text: Perry claims that he should have received postconviction relief because the trial court erred when it told the jury: [You are] `free to tell your spouses and maybe your friends what has gone on these two days.' Perry asserts that this statement was presumptively prejudicial in that the jurors were exposed to information about his case beyond the evidence presented and that, therefore, his due process rights, as guaranteed by the U.S. and Nebraska Constitutions, were violated. We conclude that this argument is without merit because it concerns an issue that could have been raised on direct appeal. Since Perry was responsible for the failure to properly perfect a direct appeal, he is procedurally barred from raising this issue by a motion for postconviction relief. A motion for postconviction relief cannot be used to secure the review of an issue which could have been litigated on direct appeal. See, State v. Curtright, supra ; State v. Hess, supra .