State Nebraska v. George Bartlett

This is an appeal from the refusal of the District Court to grant a post conviction motion to vacate defendant's judgment
of conviction and sentence. Defendant was convicted by a jury of possession of heroin with intent to deliver. He was sentenced
as an habitual criminal to a term of 20 to 30 years in the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex. § 29-2221, R.
R. S. 1943. This court affirmed the judgment and sentence in State v. Bartlett, 194 Neb. 502, 233 N.W.2d 904. The trial court
held that no evidentiary hearing was required and denied defendant's motion. We affirm. The defendant asserts that he was denied his constitutional right of effective assistance of counsel at trial. Defendant
asserts that the test applied by the District Court to determine adequate representation by counsel was improper. The defendant
is correct. The trial court held the test to be whether counsel's assistance was so grossly inept as to shock the conscience
of the court. The standard was enunciated in State v. Leadinghorse, 192 Neb. 485, 222 N.W.2d 573. Under that standard, trial
counsel's performance in a particular case is measured against that of a lawyer with ordinary training and skill in the in
his area, as well as a showing of conscientious protection of the interest of his client. We will apply this standard to the
specific allegations defendant contends constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.