The Summerland Advocate-Messenger - Reliable, Trustworthy Reporting, Capturing The Heartbeat Of Our Community

The Nebraska Supreme Court has denied the appeal of an Antelope County man.

Darryl Lierman, 53, who was sentenced to 70 to 140 years in prison in March 2018, appealed his conviction in April 2018. He was convicted of eight counts of sexual assault of a child in January 2018.

Appeal proceedings were reviewed under the direction of Chief Supreme Court Justice C.J. Heavican. Bradley Ewalt of Norfolk represented the appellant, while the appellee case was handled by Attorney General Douglas Peterson and assistant Kimberly Klein.

The judgment and sentences of the district court were affirmed, with Justice J. Freudenberg, not participating. The opinion was released March 20.

The high court affirmed the conviction by a 12-member Antelope County jury. Lierman was found guilty of three counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child, two counts of third-degree sexual assault of a child and three counts of child abuse. The jury had found Lierman guilty on all counts in a unanimous decision after less than four hours of deliberation.

The Honorable Mark Johnson presided over the Antelope County district court case that was prosecuted by Antelope County Attorney Joe Abler, assistant Antelope County Attorney Joe Smith and assistant Nebraska Attorney General Sandra Allen. Lierman was represented by court-appointed counsel, Doug Stratton and Jason Doele.

Stratton filed an appeal on Lierman’s behalf in April 2018. Ewalt replaced Stratton as counsel in June 2018.

In the appeal, Lierman assigned that the district court erred in the following ways: allowing the state to present evidence of prior sexual assaults, where that evidence was in support of charges of sexual assault for which Lierman was ultimately acquitted, or where at least some of those assaults were alleged to have been committed by Lierman in other jurisdictions; not admitting evidence regarding victim’s activities; finding the evidence sufficient to convict Lierman; not recusing itself; imposing excessive sentences; and not permitting Lierman to issue subpoenas in order to obtain records through depositions. Additionally, Lierman claimed his counsel was ineffective.