Podjo Jammar Rowe v. Nebraska Highway Patrol, Kyle Gaudreault, and Eric Rosemann

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA PODJO JAMMAR ROWE, Plaintiff, 8:25CV381 vs. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER NEBRASKA HIGHWAY PATROL, KYLE GAUNDREAULT, and ERIC ROSEMANN, Defendants.

Plaintiff Podjo Jammar Rowe (“Rowe”), a non-prisoner, filed a Complaint on June 6, 2025. Filing No. 1.1 Plaintiff has been given leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Filing No. 6. The Court now conducts an initial review of Rowe’s claims to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

I. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT AND ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND Rowe brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Nebraska Highway Patrol and two Nebraska Highway Patrol Troopers, Kyle Gaudreault (“Gaudreault”) and Erice Rosemann (“Rosemann”), in their official capacities. Filing No. at 1, 3. Rowe also appears to bring this action on behalf of himself and four other individuals—Liane Feliciano, Emillio Butts, Kory Brown, and Nellani Jefferson. See Id. at 1–2.

Rowe’s claims arise out of a traffic stop that occurred on I-80 East at mile marker on July 17, 2023, at 9:24 p.m. Id. at 5. Rowe alleges the following as the facts underlying his claim: Upon initial filing, Rowe’s Complaint was unsigned. Rowe filed a signed copy of his Complaint on June 20, 2025. Filing No. 1-1.

Trooper Gaudreault accompanied by Trooper Roseman[n] detained me without explanantion [sic] threatened to do me physical harm if I did not accompany him to his cruiser after explaining to him I was Moorish American did not recognize his authority and I was only accompaning [sic] him out of duress and would like a supervisor present he placed me in his car and performed a non permitted illegal search of my vehicle without my permission not once did he attempt to contact a supervisor and went completely against protocol during the traffic stop as he indicated that was the purpose for the stop after the search he placed myself and Lianie Feliciano under arrest and placed her children in DHHS custody the following individuals were present: Lianie Feliciano, Podjo Rowe, Emilio Butts, Kory Brown, Nellani Jefferson and Mark Hyer (by phone)[.] Id. Rowe does not allege any injuries, but seeks damages for “loss of wages, emotional distress, reimbursement of legal fees, and the time of [his] imprisonment after the illegal search and seizure [and] lifting of the convictions of myself and Lianie Feliciano.” Id. at 6. Rowe also seeks damages “for all three children's emotional distress and the defamation of character of all parties involved.” Id. A search of Nebraska state court records, available to this Court online, shows that Rowe was convicted in the District Court of Buffalo County, Nebraska, in Case No. CR23-386 for offenses arising out of a traffic stop on July 16, 2023, involving Gaudreault and Roseman in the location alleged in the Complaint.2 Pursuant to a plea agreement, Rowe pleaded no contest to an amended information charging him with two counts of attempted possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, a Class II felony, two counts of prohibited person in possession of a deadly weapon, a Class III felony, and possession of a controlled substance (ecstasy), a Class IV felony, in exchange for This Court has been afforded access to the computerized record keeping system for the Nebraska state courts. The Court takes judicial notice of the state court records related to this case in State v. Podjo J.

Rowe, Case No. CR28-386, District Court of Buffalo County, Nebraska. See Stutzka v. McCarville, 420 F.3d 757, 760 n.2 (8th Cir. 2005) (court may take judicial notice of judicial opinions and public records).

Nebraska's judicial records may be retrieved on-line through the JUSTICE site, https://www.nebraska.gov/justice/case.cgi. Relevant records are attached to this Memorandum and Order. dismissal of seven additional felony counts charged in the original information.3 On March 21, 2024, Rowe was sentenced to 2 to 10 years’ imprisonment on each of the Class II felonies, 1 to 4 years’ imprisonment on each of the Class III felonies, and 1 to 2 years’ imprisonment on the Class IV felony, with all sentences running concurrently.4 According to the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services’ online inmate records, Rowe was released from custody on October 30, 2024, on discretionary parole.5 II. STANDARDS ON INITIAL REVIEW The Court is required to review in forma pauperis complaints to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The Court must dismiss a complaint or any portion of it that states a frivolous or malicious claim, that fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

“The essential function of a complaint under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is to give the opposing party ‘fair notice of the nature and basis or grounds for a claim, and a general indication of the type of litigation involved.’” Topchian v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 760 F.3d 843, 848 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting Hopkins v. Saunders, 199 F.3d 968, 973 (8th Cir. 1999)). Plaintiffs must set forth enough factual allegations to “nudge[ ] their claims across the line from conceivable to plausible,” or “their complaint must be dismissed.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 569-70 (2007); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”).

3 See attached Jan. 29, 2024, Journal Entry/Entry of Plea Order.

4 See attached Mar. 21, 2024, Sentencing Order.

5 See https://dcs-inmatesearch.ne.gov/Corrections/COR_input.jsp (last visited Jan. 8, 2026).

“A pro se complaint must be liberally construed, and pro se litigants are held to a lesser pleading standard than other parties.” Topchian, 760 F.3d at 849 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). This means that “if the essence of an allegation is discernible, even though it is not pleaded with legal nicety, then the district court should construe the complaint in a way that permits the layperson’s claim to be considered within the proper legal framework.” Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 915 (8th Cir. 2004). However, even pro se complaints are required to allege facts which, if true, state a claim for relief as a matter of law. Martin v. Aubuchon, 623 F.2d 1282, 1286 (8th Cir. 1980).

III. ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT Liberally construed, Rowe alleges federal constitutional claims. To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege a violation of rights protected by the United States Constitution or created by federal statute and also must show that the alleged deprivation was caused by conduct of a person acting under color of state law.

West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); Buckley v. Barlow, 997 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir. 1993). For the reasons that follow, Rowe’s Complaint fails to state a § 1983 claim upon which relief may be granted, but he will be given leave to amend to state a plausible Fourth Amendment claim against Gaudreault and Rosemann in their individual capacities as set forth below.

A. Claims on Behalf of Others As an initial matter, according to the caption of the Complaint, this action is purportedly brought by Rowe and four other individuals (presumably the other occupants of the vehicle stopped by Gaudreault and Rosemann), but the Complaint is only signed by Rowe and Rowe is the only listed plaintiff on the docket sheet. See Filing No. 1 at 1–2; Filing No. 1-1 at 6. To the extent Rowe is seeking relief on behalf of the other named plaintiffs, he may not do so.

Pro se litigants may not represent the interests of other parties. Litschewski v. Dooley, No. 11-4105-RAL, 2012 WL 3023249, at *1 n. 1 (D.S.D. July 24, 2012), aff’d, 502 Fed.Appx. 630 (8th Cir. 2013). Rowe also may not sign the Complaint on behalf of himself and the other plaintiffs. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) requires that all pro se parties to a case sign every pleading, written motion, and other paper that they submit to the court. Rule 11(a) helps to ensure that pro se parties consent to the filing of documents on their behalf. See United States v. Brenton, No. 8:04CR262, 2007 WL 3124539, at *1–2 (D. Neb. Oct. 23, 2007) (discussing Johnson v. O’Donnell, No. 01-C- 0257-C, 2001 WL 34372892 (W.D. Wis. Aug 24, 2001)). It is improper for a non-lawyer to sign papers in place of, or to otherwise represent, parties other than themselves.

See id. at *1 (citing 5A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1333, at & n.15 (2004)); see also Jones ex rel. Jones v. Corr. Med. Servs., Inc., 401 F.3d 950, 952 (8th Cir. 2005) (“a non-attorney . . . may not engage in the practice of law on behalf of others”) (citations omitted). Accordingly, any claims brought by Rowe on behalf of the other named plaintiffs must be dismissed.

B. Relief from Conviction Unavailable under § 1983 In his Complaint, Rowe appears to ask that his criminal convictions be “lift[ed]” or overturned. Filing No. 1 at 6. “Challenges to the validity of any confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus . . . .” Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750 (2004) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973)).

Thus, to the extent Rowe seeks relief from his convictions for which he is currently on parole, he must do so in a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and not in a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

C. Sovereign Immunity Rowe names the Nebraska Highway Patrol and Gaudreault and Rosemann in their official capacities as defendants. The Nebraska Highway Patrol, or Nebraska State Patrol as it is officially called, is a department of the State of Nebraska.

Steckelberg v. Rice, 184 F. Supp. 3d 746, 754 n.4 (D. Neb. 2016) (citing Neb. Rev. Stat. § 81–2001; Llanes v. Neb. State Patrol, No. 4:06–CV–3155, 2007 WL 1321733, at *1 n.1 (D. Neb. Apr. 2, 2007)), aff'd, 878 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2017). States or governmental entities that are considered arms of the state are not suable “persons” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 70 (1989).

In addition, the Eleventh Amendment bars claims for damages by private parties against a state, state instrumentalities, and an employee of a state sued in the employee’s official capacity. See, e.g., Egerdahl v. Hibbing Cmty. Coll., 72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir. 1995); Dover Elevator Co. v. Arkansas State Univ., 64 F.3d 442, 446–47 (8th Cir. 1995). Any award of retroactive monetary relief payable by the state, including for back pay or damages, is proscribed by the Eleventh Amendment absent a waiver of immunity by the state or an override of immunity by Congress. See, e.g., Dover Elevator Co., 64 F.3d at 447; Nevels v. Hanlon, 656 F.2d 372, 377–78 (8th Cir. 1981).

There is nothing in the record before the Court showing that the State of Nebraska waived, or that Congress overrode, sovereign immunity in this matter. Thus, the Eleventh Amendment bars Rowe’s claims against the Nebraska Highway Patrol and Gaudreault and Rosemann in their official capacities.

Because Gaudreault and Rosemann are sued only in their official capacities, Rowe’s claims against them are subject to dismissal as barred by sovereign immunity.

However, even if the Court construed Rowe’s claims as being brought against Gaudreault and Rosemann in their individual capacities, his Complaint fails to allege a plausible claim upon which relief may be granted.

D. Fourth Amendment Claims Rowe alleges Gaudreault and Rosemann detained him without explanation during a traffic stop, illegally searched his vehicle, and arrested him. Liberally construed, Rowe alleges Fourth Amendment violations.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

U.S. Const. amend. IV. “A traffic stop is constitutionally reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred.” Garcia v. City of New Hope, 984 F.3d 655, 663 (8th Cir. 2021) (quoting De La Rosa v. White, 852 F.3d 740, 743 (8th Cir. 2017)), abrogation on other grounds recognized by Laney v. City of St. Louis, Mo., 56 F.4th 1153 (8th Cir. 2023). “Explained another way, ‘any traffic violation, even a minor one, gives an officer probable cause to stop the violator,’ and therefore, ‘any ulterior motivation on the officer's part is irrelevant.’” Id. at 664 (quoting Johnson v. Crooks, 326 F.3d 995, 998 (8th Cir. 2003)). “Whether probable cause exists depends upon the reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the facts known to the officer at the time.” Id. (quoting United States v. Demilia, 771 F.3d 1051, 1054 (8th Cir. 2014)).

After stopping a vehicle, an officer has the authority to ask the driver what his or her destination and purpose is, check the driver’s license and registration, or request that the driver step out of the vehicle. United States v. Payne, 534 F.3d 948, 951 (8th Cir. 2008). An officer may also request identification from passengers and question them to verify information given by the driver, United States v. Gaxiola, 149 F. App’x 560, 562 (8th Cir. 2005), and may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop, Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408, 415 (1997). A traffic stop can last as long as reasonably necessary to conduct this routine investigation, conduct a criminal history search, and issue a citation. Payne, 534 F.3d at 951. If this routine investigation raises the officer’s suspicions and the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion, the officer may expand the scope of the investigation. Id. This may include asking about weapons and requesting consent to search the vehicle. See United States v. Cox, 992 F.3d 706, 710–11 (8th Cir. 2021).

The Fourth Amendment permits a law enforcement officer to make a warrantless arrest if he has probable cause to believe the arrestee has committed an offense—even a minor offense. Lawyer v. City of Council Bluffs, 361 F.3d 1099, 1105–06 (8th Cir. 2004). One of the exceptions to the warrant requirement is a search incident to a lawful arrest. See Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 338 (2009). “The exception derives from interests in officer safety and evidence preservation that are typically implicated in arrest situations.” Id. This exception justifies a warrantless search of the arrestee’s person and the area within his or her immediate control, i.e., the area from within which he or she might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. See Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 763 (1969).

Though Rowe alleges Gaudreault and Rosemann detained him without explanation and illegally searched his vehicle, he alleges absolutely no facts to support these conclusory allegations. Indeed, the scant allegations of Rowe’s Complaint fail to provide any factual context for what happened during the traffic stop or the alleged unlawful detention and search and, thus, are insufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. As the Supreme Court has explained, “[a] pleading that offers ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.’

Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual enhancement.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (internal citation omitted) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557).

On its own motion, the Court will give Rowe leave to amend his Complaint to allege sufficient facts to state a plausible Fourth Amendment claim against Gaudreault and Rosemann in their individual capacities. If Rowe chooses to amend his Complaint, he should be aware that if success on the merits of his Fourth Amendment civil rights claim would necessarily implicate the validity of his conviction or continued confinement, his civil rights claim must be preceded by a favorable outcome in habeas corpus or similar proceeding in a state or federal forum. Absent such a favorable disposition of the charges or conviction, Rowe may not use 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to cast doubt on the legality of his conviction or confinement. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87 (1994).

IV. CONCLUSION Rowe’s Complaint fails to state a plausible claim for relief and is, therefore, subject to dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). On the Court’s own motion, Rowe will be given 30 days in which to file an amended complaint that states a plausible claim for relief against Gaudreault and Rosemann in their individual capacities and clearly explains what defendants did to him, when defendants did it, and how defendants’ actions harmed him. Rowe is advised that any amended complaint he files will supersede his original Complaint.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Rowe shall have 30 days to file an amended complaint in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Failure to file an amended complaint within the time specified by the Court will result in the Court dismissing this case without further notice to Rowe.

2. In the event that Rowe files an amended complaint, Rowe shall restate the relevant allegations of the Complaint, Filing No. 1, and any new allegations. Failure to consolidate all claims into one document may result in the abandonment of claims.

Rowe is warned that an amended complaint will supersede, not supplement, his prior pleadings.

3. The Court reserves the right to conduct further review of Rowe’s claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) in the event he files an amended complaint.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline using the following text: February 11, 2026: deadline for amended complaint.

5. Rowe shall keep the Court informed of his current address at all times while this case is pending. Failure to do so may result in dismissal without further notice.

Dated this 12th day of January, 2026.

BY THE COURT: Gs ¥ ~ Joseph F. Bataillon Senior United States District Judge

IN ele) = WU lel(elr-l □□□ □□□□□

Nebraska Courts Case Search O Trial Case by Judgment 0 Trial Case by Name 0 Trial Case by Number O FAQ O De Summary In the District Court of Buffalo County The Case ID is CR 23 9000386 Citation No.: eeeeeee State v. Podjo J Rowe The Honorable John H Marsh, presiding.

Classification: Felony-Bindover Filed on 68/18/2023 by the County Prosecutor This case is Closed as of 93/21/2024 It was disposed as Guilty Plea/Admission in Court to the Case Party Attorney Plaintiff ACTIVE State of Nebraska Defendant ACTIVE Podjo J Rowe 24799 Lakeshore Blvd Eculid OH 44123 Date of Birth is a Drivers License is Podjo J Rowe owes $185.60 Witness ACTIVE Lianie Y Feliciano Buffalo County Jail Kearney NE 68847 Witness ACTIVE Christopher Watts Valley Pharmacy Kearney NE 68845 Information Count Charge Offense Class @1 Possess firearm while commit felony 3 Class 2 Felony AMENDED TO...Attempt of a class 1/1A/1B/1C/1D felony ; Class 2 Felony Offense Date is 07/16/2023 Plea is No Contest Finding is Guilty Sentence includes: Jail-Minimum Sentence Start Date 93/21/2024 Term of @2 Years Jail-Maximum Sentence Start Date 63/21/2624 Term of 10 Years Credit for Days Served Term of 250 Days Offender Assessment Screening of $16 /60 @2 Possess firearm while commit felony 3; Class 2 Felony AMENDED TO...Attempt of a class 1/1A/1B/1C/1D felony, Class 2 Felony Offense Date is 97/16/2023 Plea is No Contest Finding is Guilty Sentence includés: Jail-Minimum Sentence Start Date @3/21/2024 Term of @2 Years Jail-Maximum Sentence Start Date 63/21/2024 Term of 10 Years @3 Possess deadly weapon while commit felny ; Class 3 Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 07/16/2023 @4 Possess deadly weapon while commit felny ; Class 3 Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 97/16/2023 @5 Possess firearm by prohibited person-ist ; Class 1D Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 07/16/2023 @6 Possess firearm by prohibited person-1st ; Class 1D Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 97/16/2023 @7 Possess deadly weapon-prohibited person ; Class 3 Felony Offense Date is 97/16/2023 Finding is Guilty Sentence includes: Jail-Minimum Sentence Start Date 63/21/2624 Term of @1 Years Jail-Maximum Sentence Start Date 93/21/2024 Term of 64 Years @8 Possess deadly weapon-prohibited person ; Class 3 Felony Offense Date is 07/16/2023 Plea is No Contest Finding is Guilty Sentence includes: Jail-Minimum Sentence Start Date 93/21/2024 Term of 61 Years Jail-Maximum Sentence Start Date 03/21/2024 Term of 064 Years @9 Possess controlled substance ; Class 4 Felony Offense Date is 07/16/2023 Plea is No Contest Finding is Guilty Sentence includes: Jail-Minimum Sentence Start, Date 03/21/2024 Term of 61 Years Jail-Maximum Sentence Start Date 63/21/2624 Term of @2 Years 1@ Possess controlled substance 3 Class 4 Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 07/16/2023 Possess controlled substance ; Class 4 Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 97/16/2023 Possess controlled substance ; Class 4 Felony AMENDED TO...Count dropped/dismissed Offense Date is 07/16/2023 Officers Agency Officer Nebraska State Patrol Kyle Gaudreault Costs Information By Account Date Amo Information 08/21/2023 $35 Automation Fee 08/21/2023 $8 NSC Education Fee 08/21/2023 $1 Dispute Resolution Fee 08/21/2023 $0 Indigent Defense Fee 08/21/2023 $3 Uniform Data Analysis Fee 08/21/2023 $1 JLR.F. 08/21/2023 $6 Filing Fee-JRF 08/21/2023 $7 Crime Victim Fund 08/21/2023 $1 Civil Legal Services Fund 08/21/2023 $1 L.E.I.F. 08/21/2023 $2 Legal Aid/Services Fund 08/21/2023 $6 Comp Rec/Records Management 08/21/2023 $15 County Court Fees 08/22/2023 $50 Service Fees 01/16/2024 $18 Service Fees 01/19/2024 $20 Activity No trust money is held by the court No fee money is held by the court for Recovery By Account Date Amo Information 08/21/2023 $35 Automation Fee 08/21/2023 $8 NSC Education Fee 08/21/2023 $1 Dispute Resolution Fee 08/21/2023 $0 Indigent Defense Fee 08/21/2023 $3 Uniform Data Analysis Fee 08/21/2023 $1 J-R.F. 08/21/2023 $6 Filing Fee-JRF 08/21/2023 $7 Civil Legal Services Fund 08/21/2023 $1 L.E.I.F. 08/21/2023 $2 Legal Aid/Services Fund 08/21/2023 $6 Comp Rec/Records Management 08/21/2023 $15 County Court Fees 08/22/2023 $50 Service Fees 01/16/2024 $18 Service Fees 01/19/2024 $20 Made to the Court Type Date For Amo Non-Monetary Rec 01/19/2024 State of Nebraska Void Non-Monetary Rec 01/19/2024 State of Nebraska $20 Service Fees $20 Non-Monetary Rec 01/16/2024 State of Nebraska $18 Service Fees $18 Check 09/29/2023 State of Nebraska $36 Automation Fee $8 NSC Education Fee $1 Dispute Resolution Fee $ Indigent Defense Fee $3 Uniform Data Analysis $1 JLR.F. $6 Filing Fee-JRF $7 Civil Legal Services F $1 L.E.L.F. $2 Legal Aid/Services Fun $6 of Actions @3/21/2624 Abstract-Voter Reg/CR History Order sent to Cuyahoga County, OH election commissioner 63/21/2624 Sentencing Order This action initiated by John H Marsh eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N24081S4KDe9 Q3/21/2024 Commitment Issued on Podjo J Rowe The document number is 09050283 Image ID 909@35141eDe9 @3/20/2624 Note from Court Staff PSI shared: Willils/Calkins @2/16/2624 Entry of Appearance This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N24647TYLD69 @1/29/2624 Journal Entry This action initiated by John H Marsh entry of plea/sentencing March 21,, 2024 @\9:@@am eNotice Certificate Atta ched Image ID N24629ZRYD69 @1/29/2624 Amended Information This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N24629YZ6De9 Order This action initiated by John H Marsh order to endorse additonal witness eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N24019UL8De9 Notice Filed This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe notice of hearing Jan 29,2024 @ 9:0@am Image ID N24019SCAD@9 PIVLIOT FILLE This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe motion to suppress Image ID N24619SBSD69 Return-Subpoena-Criminal/Juvenile The document number is 90049422 Served 61/18/2024 Personal Service Served at Valley Pharmacy Image ID Deee49466De9 Subpoena Issued on Christopher Watts The document number is 90049422 Image ID De@e049422De9 Praecipe-Subpoena This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N24017HS7De9 01/17/2024 Motion Filed This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N240617HRNDOO @1/16/2024 Return-Subpoena-Criminal/Juvenile The document number is 00049368 Served 01/12/2024, Buffalo County Sheriff Personal Service Served at Buffalo County Jail Image ID Deee49392De9 @1/12/2024 Subpoena Issued on Lianie Y Feliciano The document number is 90049368 Image ID D@0049368De9 Praecipe-Subpoena This action initiated by party State of Nebraska 01/09/2024 Order This action initiated by John H Marsh order setting bench trial Jan 29, 2024 @ 9:@@m eNotice Certificate Attach ed Image ID N24009H75De9 01/62/2024 Order-Jury Trial This action initiated by John H Marsh Jan 22, 2024 @ 9:@@am eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N24002IVLD@9 12/15/2023 Order-Hearing This action initiated by John H Marsh Final Status Hearing: January 5, 2624 @ 8:45am eNotice Certificate Attac hed Image ID N23349WRFD@9 12/61/2023 Order This action initiated by John H Marsh order setting jury trial Jan 22, 2024 @ 9:60am eNotice Certificate Attach ed Image ID N2333545ND69 11/21/2023 Order-Continuance This action initiated by John H Marsh final plea/pretrial Nov 30, 2023 @ 1:3@ pm eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N23325YKKD69 10/31/2023 Order-Continuance This action initiated by John H Marsh Nov 28, 2023 @ 1:36 pm eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N23304BZXD69 16/30/2023 Motion Filed This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe Image ID N233036KZD69 10/02/2023 Request This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe Image ID 9090348856De9 Q9/26/2623 Written Not Guilty Plea This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe Image ID N23269XTND@9 69/20/2623 Order This action initiated by John H Marsh order re: bond stays same $20,000 cash or surety eNotice Certificate Atta ched Image ID N23263A1ND09 69/13/2623 Objection This action initiated by partyyState of Nebraska objection to bond review Image ID N23256DMAD69 Affidavit-Support of Motion This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe Image ID N23256CE7D@9 Motion Filed This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe motion for bond review Image ID N23256CE2D09 09/12/2023 Order-Reciprocal Discovery This action initiated by John H Marsh eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N23255/7H9D@9 MOTION-KRECIPrOcal Viscovery This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N23255406De9 Order-Discovery This action initiated by John H Marsh eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N2325@LRQD69 Motion-Discovery This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe Image ID N23250J8XD@9 09/07/2023 Motion Filed This action initiated by party Podjo J Rowe motion for bond review Image ID N2325@J8HDe9 08/23/2023 Progression Order This action initiated by John-H Marsh arraignment Sept 26, 2623 @ 11¢15™am final plea/pretrial Oct 31, 2623 @ 1 :3@ pm eNotice Certificate Attached Image ID N23235RLWD69 Case Manually Assigned Previous Judge 90000; New Judge 18127; User ID ce9e1041 08/22/2023 Transcript-County Court This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Transcript received electronically.

Image ID De90047818De9 08/21/2023 Information This action initiated by party State of Nebraska Image ID N23233GH8D69 Tale lt-vem □□ (18) 0-F1.¢- mele) □□□□□□□ □□□□□□□□ mele. □□□□ □□□□□ LT Case Number: D09CR230000386 Transaction ID: 0021092704 JOURNAL ENTRY / ENTRY |Filing Date: 01/29/2024 05:17:50 PM ¢ OF PLEA IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BUFFALO COUNTY, NEBRASKA STATE V. PODJO J ROWE Case ID: CR23-3 On the 29th day of January, 2024, this matter comes on for an entry of plea hearing.

APPEARANCE AND ADVISEMENT Judge John H. Marsh Defendant Podjo J. Rowe Defense Counsel Richard Calkins Prosecutor Michael Mefferd Waived service of Amended/Information. Waived reading of Amended/Information.

Rights advisement given.«Deéefendant advised of the charges and all possible penalties.

ARRAIGNMENT Upon inguiry by the Court, the Defendant acknowledged Defendant’s understandin of rights, charges, proceedings and penalties, and further acknowledged Defendant’s understanding that the entry of a plea of guilty or no contest, waives all rights to trial.

CHARGES (AMENDMENTS /PLEAS /FINDINGS/FINES /PRESENTENCE/JAIL/DISMISSALS) Defendant pled ( ) Guilty ( X ) No Contest to: CCoouunntt 22:: AAtttteemmpptteedd PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa FFiirreeaarrmm bbyy aa PPrroohhiibbiitteedd PPeerrssoonn -- 11sstt OOffffeennssee,, aa CCllaassss IIII FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 33:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 44:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 55:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 66:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 77:: PPrroohhiibbiitteedd PPeerrssoonn iinn PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa DDeeaaddllyy WWeeaappoonn,, aa CCllaassss IIIIII FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 88:: PPrroohhiibbiitteedd PPeerrssoonn iinn PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa DDeeaaddllyy WWeeaappoonn,, aa CCllaassss IIIIII FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 99:: PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa CCoonnttrroolllleedd SSuubbssttaannccee,, ttoo--wwiitt:: EEccssttaassyy,, aa CCllaassss IIVV FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 1100:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 1111:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 1122:: DDiissmmiisssseedd TThhee CCoouurrtt rreecceeiivveedd EExxhhiibbiittss 11,, 22 && 33 ffoorr tthhee ffaaccttuuaall bbaassiiss.. TThhee CCoouurrtt ffiinnddss tthhaatt aann aaddeeqquuaattee ffaaccttuuaall bbaassiiss wwaass eessttaabblliisshheedd ffoorr tthhee pplleeaa.. AAfftteerr ffuurrtthheerr iinnqquuiirryy tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt aacckknnoowwlleeddggeedd tthhaatt tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt’’ss pplleeaa wwaass nnoott tthhee rreessuulltt ooff aannyy pprroommiissee oorr tthhrreeaatt.. TThhee CCoouurrtt ffoouunndd tthhaatt tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt’’ss pplleeaa wwaass eenntteerreedd kknnoowwiinnggllyy,, vvoolluunnttaarriillyy aanndd iinntteelllliiggeennttllyy aanndd tthhaatt tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt kknnoowwiinnggllyy,, vvoolluunnttaarriillyy aanndd iinntteelllliiggeennttllyy wwaaiivveedd DDeeffeennddaanntt’’ss ccoonnssttiittuuttiioonnaall rriigghhttss aass hheerreeiinnaabboovvee eexxppllaaiinneedd.. PPlleeaa nneeggoottiiaattiioonnss eexxppllaaiinneedd bbyy CCoouunnsseell.. TThhee CCoouurrtt ffoouunndd tthhaatt tthhee pplleeaa ooff tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt wwaass aacccceepptteedd aanndd ccoonnvviiccttiioonn iiss eenntteerreedd ppuurrssuuaanntt tthheerreettoo..

OOtthheerr FFiinnddiinnggss//PPlleeaa BBaarrggaaiinn TThhee SSttaattee wwiillll aammeenndd CCoouunnttss 11 aanndd 22 ttoo AAtttteemmpptteedd PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa FFiirreeaarrmm bbyy aa PPrroohhiibbiitteedd PPeerrssoonn -- 11sstt OOffffeennssee,, aanndd ddiissmmiissss CCoouunnttss 33,, 44,, 55,, 66,, 1100,, 1111,, aanndd 1122 iinn eexxcchhaannggee ffoorr tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt''ss pplleeaa ooff gguuiillttyy oorr nnoo ccoonntteesstt ttoo CCoouunnttss 11 aanndd 22 plea agreement.

ADDITIONAL ENTRIES OF RECORD Thereafter the Court ordered the State Probation Office to conduct a full presentence investigation and make an appropriate report of their findings to the Court. Said Presentence Investigation, at the discretion of a probation officer, shall include: Substance Abuse Evaluation.

Sentencing has been scheduled for: March 21, 2024, at 9:00 a.m.

Pending sentencing, the Defendant is remanded to the custody of the Buffalo County Jail.

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED AS HEREINABOVE SET FORTH.

BY THE DISTRICT COURT: a * (Ge John H Marsh CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE the undersigned, certify that on January 30, 2024 , I served a copy of the foregoing upon the following persons at the addresses given, by mailing by United States Ma prepaid, or via E-mail: Calkins Michael L Mefferd [email protected] et So ae, January 30, 2024 BY THE COURT: | rofl. □ agi Seal ASE “EaS.. SoCs CLERK GEA Mon, as hy, Co oa He? “ey COUNT as CY Case Number: DO9CR230000386 Transaction ID: 0021338743 SENTENCING ORDER Filing Date: 03/21/2024 10:51:40 AM C IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BUFFALO COUNTY, NEBRASKA STATE V. PODJO J ROWE Case ID: □□□□□□□ On this 21st day of March, 2024, this matter came on for sentencing hearing.

APPEARANCE AND ADVISEMENT Judge John H. Marsh Defendant Podjo Jammar Rowe Defense Counsel Richard Calkins Prosecutor Melissa Willis CHARGES AND FINDINGS The defendant was previously=convicted: Count 1: AttemptedyPossession of a Firearm by a Prohibited Person, lst Offense - a Class II Felony Count 2: Attempted Possession of a Firearm by a Prohibited Person, lst Offense - a Class II Felony Count 3: Dismissed Count 4: Dismissed Count 5: Dismissed CCoouunntt 88:: PPrroohhiibbiitteedd PPeerrssoonn iinn PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff aa DDeeaaddllyy WWeeaappoonn,, aa CCllaassss IIIIII FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 99:: PPoosssseessssiioonn ooff CCoonnttrroolllleedd SSuubbssttaannccee,, ttoo--wwiitt:: EEccssttaassyy,, aa CCllaassss IIVV FFeelloonnyy CCoouunntt 1100:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunntt 1111:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouutt 1122:: DDiissmmiisssseedd CCoouunnsseell ffoorr bbootthh SSttaattee aanndd tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt ssttaattee tthhaatt tthheeyy hhaavvee hhaadd tthhee ooppppoorrttuunniittyy ttoo rreeaadd aanndd eexxaammiinnee tthhee pprreesseenntteennccee iinnvveessttiiggaattiioonn rreeppoorrtt.. CCoouunnsseell ffoorr tthhee DDeeffeennddaanntt oobbjjeeccttss ttoo tthhee PPSSII.. TThhee CCoouurrtt hheeaarrdd aarrgguummeenntt ooff ccoouunnsseell rreeggaarrddiinngg tthhee PPSSII.. UUppoonn ccoonnssiiddeerraattiioonn,, tthhee CCoouurrtt wwiillll ddiissrreeggaarrdd aannyy rreeccoommmmeennddaattiioonnss oouuttssiiddee ooff ssuubbssttaannccee aabbuussee..

AAllllooccuuttiioonn ooffffeerreedd.. NNeeiitthheerr tthhee ddeeffeennddaanntt nnoorr ccoouunnsseell hhaavviinngg ggiivveenn aannyy rreeaassoonn wwhhyy sseenntteennccee sshhoouulldd nnoott bbee pprroonnoouunncceedd,, tthhee CCoouurrtt sseenntteenncceess tthhee ddeeffeennddaanntt aass ffoolllloowwss:: IITT IISS TTHHEERREEFFOORREE TTHHEE JJUUDDGGMMEENNTT AANNDD SSEENNTTEENNCCEE OOFF TTHHEE CCOOUURRTT tthhaatt tthhee ddeeffeennddaanntt iiss oorrddeerreedd iimmpprriissoonneedd iinn tthhee NNeebbrraasskkaa DDeeppaarrttmmeenntt ooff CCoorrrreeccttiioonnss//BBuuffffaalloo CCoouunnttyy JJaaiill ttoo sseerrvvee tthhee ffoolllloowwiinngg sseenntteennccee((ss)):: CCoouunntt 11:: NNoott lleessss tthhaann 22 yyeeaarrss nnoorr mmoorree tthhaann 1100 yyeeaarrss;; CCoouunntt 22:: NNoott lleessss tthhaann 22 yyeeaarrss nnoorr mmoorree tthhaann 1100 yyeeaarrss;; CCoouunntt 77:: NNoott lleessss tthhaann 11 yyeeaarr nnoorr mmoorree tthhaann 44 yyeeaarrss;; CCoouunntt 88:: NNoott lleessss tthhaann 11 yyeeaass nnoorr mmoorree tthhaann 44 yyeeaarrss;; CCoouunntt 99:: NNoott lleessss tthhaann 11yyeeaarr nnoorr mmoorree tthhaann 22 yyeeaarrss;; DDeeffeennddaanntt iiss ggiivveenn 225500 ddaayyss ccrreeddiitt ffoorr ttiimmee aallrreeaaddyy sseerrvveedd..

TThhee sseenntteennccee oonn eeaacchh ccoouunntt sshhaallll rruunn ccoonnccuurrrreenntt ttoo oonnee aannootthheerr..

DDeeffeennddaanntt iiss oorrddeerreedd ttoo ppaayy CCoossttss ooff tthhiiss aaccttiioonn provided same.

Defendant’s bond, if any, is ordered released and applied to costs.

Defendant advised of prohibition under 18 U.S.C. 922 (g) (9) regarding firearms Defendant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff for transportation to the Nebraska Department of Corrections to commence serving his sentence.

BY THE DISTRICT COURT: (EO nnn John H Marsh CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE the undersigned, certify that on March 21, 2024 , I served a copy of the foregoing upon the following persons at the addresses given, by mailing by United States Ma prepaid, or via E-mail: Calkins Melissa L Willis [email protected] et So ae, bh, Arberaw | ( March 21, 2024 BY THE COURT: ¢ r ‘ “EaS.. SoCs CLERK GEA Mon, as hy, Co oa He? “ey COUNT as