Opinion ID: 1642283
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Presentence Report Review

Text: In his brief, Sanders claims that his counsel was ineffective because he failed to review the defendant's presentence report with him or on his behalf. There is nothing in either the trial or postconviction records to indicate that Sanders' counsel failed to review the presentence report with Sanders or on his behalf. See State v. Domingus, 234 Neb. 267, 450 N.W.2d 668 (1990). Even if Sanders' counsel did fail to review the presentence report with the defendant or on his behalf, Sanders has not shown how he was prejudiced by this alleged deficiency in his counsel's performance. See State v. Chapman, 234 Neb. 369, 451 N.W.2d 263 (1990). This assignment of error is meritless.