essence claim in Nebraska

2023The threshold to entitle a prisoner to an evidentiary hearing on such a postconviction claim is ‘“extraordinarily high.”’ Such a petitioner must make a strong demonstration of actual innocence because after a fair trial and conviction, the presumption of innocence vanishes.” State v. Newman, 300 Neb. at 793 , 916 N.W.2d at 413 (quoting State v. Dubray, 294 Neb. 937 , 885 N.W.2d 540 (2016)).

2018The essence of a claim of actual innocence is that the State’s continued incarceration of such a petitioner without an opportunity to present newly discovered evidence is a denial of proce- dural or substantive due process. - 773 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 300 Nebraska R eports STATE v. NEWMAN Cite as 300 Neb. 770 25 .

2023The threshold to entitle a prisoner to an evidentiary hearing on such a postconviction claim is ‘“extraordinarily high.”’ Such a petitioner must make a strong demonstration of actual innocence because after a fair trial and conviction, the presumption of innocence vanishes.” State v. Newman, 300 Neb. at 793 , 916 N.W.2d at 413 (quoting State v. Dubray, 294 Neb. 937 , 885 N.W.2d 540 (2016)).

2023The threshold to entitle a prisoner to an evidentiary hearing on such a postconviction claim is ‘“extraordinarily high.”’ Such a petitioner must make a strong demonstration of actual innocence because after a fair trial and conviction, the presumption of innocence vanishes.” State v. Newman, 300 Neb. at 793 , 916 N.W.2d at 413 (quoting State v. Dubray, 294 Neb. 937 , 885 N.W.2d 540 (2016)).

2022“The essence of the test is the probable dependability with which claimant can sell his services in a competitive labor market.” Id. at 470-71 , 461 N.W.2d at 574 (quoting 2 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen’s Compensation § 57.51(a) (1989)).

2022“The essence of the test is the probable dependability with which claimant can sell his services in a competitive labor market.” Id. at 470-71 , 461 N.W.2d at 574 (quoting 2 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen’s Compensation § 57.51(a) (1989)).

2024Id.

2023COX Cite as 314 Neb. 104 actual innocence may be a sufficient allegation of a constitu- tional violation under the Nebraska Postconviction Act, and he argues that an evidentiary hearing was necessary “for full development of the record to determine whether Cox is actu- ally innocent of all the offenses he was convicted of after trial,” brief for appellant at 27. [18,19] While we have recognized that a claim of actual innocence may support postconviction relief, we have fur- ther stated: “The essence of a claim of actual innocence is that the State’s continued incarceration of such a petitioner

2002(Emphasis in original.) (Emphasis supplied.) Iwanski, 259 Neb. at 642 , 611 N.W.2d at 614 .

2002(Emphasis in original.) (Emphasis supplied.) Iwanski, 259 Neb. at 642 , 611 N.W.2d at 614 .

2022Long v. Hacker, supra. Res ipsa loquitur is a procedural tool that, if applicable, allows an inference of a defendant’s negligence to be submitted to the fact finder, - 348 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports EVANS v. FREEDOM HEALTHCARE Cite as 311 Neb. 336 where it may be accepted or rejected.

2016Dubray’s Claim of Actual Innocence [10,11] A claim of actual innocence may be a sufficient allegation of a constitutional violation under the Nebraska Postconviction Act.14 The essence of a claim of actual 8 See State v. Dragon, 287 Neb. 519 , 843 N.W.2d 618 (2014). 9 Neb.

1994Beatty v. Davis, 224 Neb. 663 , 400 N.W.2d 850 (1987); McCall v. St.

1994Beatty v. Davis, 224 Neb. 663 , 400 N.W.2d 850 (1987); McCall v. St.

1993The fundamental rule at work here is that “ ‘[a] party is not in contempt of court for a failure to comply with an order to pay alimony unless it is shown that he had sufficient ability to pay and that his refusal was wilful and contumacious and without just and reasonable ground.’ ” Thuman v. Thuman, 144 Neb. 177, 179 , 13 N.W.2d 117, 118 (1944) (quoting Wright v. Wright, 132 Neb. 619 , 272 N.W. 568 (1937)).

1993The fundamental rule at work here is that “ ‘[a] party is not in contempt of court for a failure to comply with an order to pay alimony unless it is shown that he had sufficient ability to pay and that his refusal was wilful and contumacious and without just and reasonable ground.’ ” Thuman v. Thuman, 144 Neb. 177, 179 , 13 N.W.2d 117, 118 (1944) (quoting Wright v. Wright, 132 Neb. 619 , 272 N.W. 568 (1937)).

1986State v. Peery, supra. Nevertheless, any argument that a “death-qualified” jury is partial or biased, which is the essence of this claim, must fail because “an impartial jury consists of nothing more than ‘jurors who will conscientiously apply the law and find the facts.’ ” Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162, 178 , 106 S. Ct. 1758 , 90 L.

1986State v. Peery, supra. Nevertheless, any argument that a “death-qualified” jury is partial or biased, which is the essence of this claim, must fail because “an impartial jury consists of nothing more than ‘jurors who will conscientiously apply the law and find the facts.’ ” Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162, 178 , 106 S. Ct. 1758 , 90 L.

1924Wigmore, in his work on Evidence (2d ed.) vol. 1, sec. 2336, says: “The essence of the privilege is to protect confidences only.” And, as observed by Bishop, J., in the case of Sexton v. Sexton, 129 Ia. 487 , 2 L.

1914The rule is in the interest of safe and reliable evidence. * * * The essence of the rule is that when the confessions are made the conditions as to hope or fear are such as to make them unsafe as evidence.” State v. Novak, 109 Ia. 717, 729 .

1895The most lucid and logical statement of the rule under consideration that has been made by this court will be found in Anheuser-Busch Brewing Association v. Peterson, 41 Neb., 897 , where Post, J., speaking for the court, said: “Every proprietor may lawfully improve his property by doing what is reasonably necessary for that purpose, and unless guilty of some act of negligence in the manner of its execution, will not be answerable to an adjoining proprietor, although he may thereby cause the surface water to flow on to the premises of the latter to his damage; but if in the execution of such e