Court Opinion

ID: 9741903
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:03:57.60958+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:27.100148
License: Public Domain

Boslaugh, J.,
dissenting.
It is fundamental that an application for postconviction relief must allege facts which, if true, would entitle the prisoner to relief.
In a proceeding under the Post Conviction Act, the appellant is required to allege facts which, if proved, constitute a violation or infringement of constitutional rights, and alleging mere conclusions of fact or of law are [sic] not sufficient to require the court to grant an evidentiary hearing.
(Syllabus of the court.) State v. Russ, 193 Neb. 308, 226 N.W.2d 775 (1975).
The amended motion to vacate and set aside judgment and *863sentence filed by the defendant is a 10-page “shotgun” type pleading. Paragraph 4 alleges that exhibits Nos. 22 (pocketknife) and 24 (handcuffs) were obtained “by way of an illegal search” by arresting officers. No fact is alleged which would explain why the defendant contends the search was illegal. More importantly, no fact is alleged which might be the basis for a contention that the arrest was illegal.
If a hearing is to be granted upon the basis of a pleading such as that filed in this case, then there is no longer a requirement that an application for postconviction relief plead facts as distinguished from conclusions.
Caporale, J., j oins in this dissent.