Who We Are

Our Lawyers

Meet the lawyers who will be working on your case. With more than 60 years of collective trial experience, we have much to offer you, including awards, accolades and nominations that cannot be matched.

Our Lawyers

In The News

Our Lawyers
in the Media

At Domina Law Group we are fortunate to work on fascinating and compelling legal problems and lawsuits that change laws and affect our country – Media across the US and across the borders agree. Read stories and watch videos of our cases and with our lawyers.

Attorney Referrals

Our firm has a reputation as leaders in complex litigation.

Get the best result possible by partnering with us.

Our legal skills have been utilized in some of the most specialized and complicated cases. These cases were often referred to us by other professionals in the field. We honor and respect lawyers and other professionals who choose to refer complex cases to our law firm.

We have paid millions in fees to our co-counsel. Call us.

Learn More

Contact Us

Contact Us Today

Send Your Message

Trial is legal surgery, the narrowest specialty, and it requires unique skills. Our clients want our service and hope they never need it again- like surgery.

Nebraska's Appellate Courts Reach Different Results Weighing Evidence in Criminal Case.

Michael L. Ross was convicted by a jury who found the evidence sufficient to support criminal charges of discharge of a firearm at a person, building, or occupied vehicle while in the proximity of a motor vehicle he had just exited, use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony, and possession of a deadly weapon by a felon. Ross appealed to the Nebraska Court of Appeals. It reversed the trial court, holding evidence against Ross was insufficient to sustain the convictions.

Dissatisfied with the Court of Appeals’ ruling, the State petitioned the Nebraska Supreme court to reevaluate the Court of Appeals’ work.

In an April 26th Opinion, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals, reinstated the jury verdict, and concluded the evidence was sufficient to sustain it.

An Opinion which details the evidence proven at trial turned, legally, on the definition of “evidence.” The Supreme Court returned to basic rules in its pronouncement, noting that:

Whether the evidence is direct, circumstantial, or a combination thereof, the standard is the same: an appellate court does not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or reweigh the evidence; such matters are for the finder of fact.
State v. Ross, 283 Neb 742, 750 (April 26, 2012).

The Supreme Court concurred with the Court of Appeals that no witness was able to identify Ross by name as the shooter. On this point, the evidence was primarily circumstantial. The court defined “ circumstantial” as follows:

Circumstantial evidence [as] evidence which, without going directly to prove the existence of a fact, gives rise to a logical inference that such fact exists. Circumstantial in evidence is not inherently less probative than direct evidence, and a fact proved by circumstantial evidence is nonetheless a proven fact.

The court noted that when a jury finds a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, it
“may rely upon circumstantial evidence and the inferences that may be drawn therefrom.”

Ross recites familiar rules of law. But, it deals with contentious facts where a strong argument existed to the effect that the state’s evidence only proved two equal probabilities. When the jury chose one of the probabilities over the other, the real issue was whether the choice was made arbitrarily or on the basis of evidence. The Supreme Court’s decision makes it clear the Court will not lightly reweigh a jury’s decision in a criminal case where any credible evidence, or circumstantial evidence, supports the outcome.

Categories: Criminal Defense

How Can We Help You?

Tell us about your case.

Send Your Message