Danny Ortega, Jr. v. State of Minnesota, 856 N.W.2d 98

Ortega was convicted of aiding and abetting first-degree premeditated murder and sentenced to life without release; direct appeal affirmed.
Ortega petitioned for postconviction relief asserting that a key eyewitness, Eric Bermea, gave false testimony and recanted.
Severo Ortega (Eric’s uncle) filed an affidavit claiming Eric recanted and felt pressure to implicate Danny Ortega Jr.
Postconviction court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, citing lack of competent recantation evidence.
Appellate court reviews for abuse of discretion and applies Larrison v. United States three-prong test for witness recantation.
Court affirms denial, holding the second prong of Larrison is not satisfied given substantial other evidence of guilt.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the postconviction court should have held an evidentiary hearing on recanted testimony.	Ortega contends recantation could change outcome.	State argues recantation is cumulated with other evidence; no hearing needed.	No evidentiary hearing required; second prong unmet.
Whether the second Larrison prong was satisfied.	Recantation might have altered the verdict.	Other evidence still supports guilt; recantation not likely to change verdict.	Not satisfied; record shows substantial other proof of guilt.
Whether the first and third Larrison prongs affect the result given the second prong.	If the second prong were met, others could justify a hearing.	Even with credibility concerns, the second prong governs denial of hearing.	Irrelevant because second prong dispositive.

Larrison v. United States, 24 F.2d 82 (7th Cir. 1928) (test for granting new trial based on recanted testimony (three-prong))
Evans v. State, 788 N.W.2d 38 (Minn. 2010) (recantation insufficient where other evidence supports guilt)
Turnage v. State, 729 N.W.2d 593 (Minn. 2007) (second prong requires possibility of different outcome without recanted testimony)
Vance v. State, 752 N.W.2d 509 (Minn. 2008) (recantations insufficient where other corroborating evidence exists)
Doppler v. State, 771 N.W.2d 867 (Minn. 2009) (other evidence indicating unlikely different outcome)
Martin v. State, 825 N.W.2d 734 (Minn. 2013) (recanted testimony as sole or pivotal evidence may trigger second prong)
Dobbins v. State, 788 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. 2010) (recantation alongside limited other evidence not likely to change verdict)
Ferguson v. State, 779 N.W.2d 555 (Minn. 2010) (recanted witness could alter outcome where pivotal; depends on accompanying evidence)
Ferguson v. State, 645 N.W.2d 444 (Minn. 2002) (recantation and impact on multiple witnesses)
Opsahl v. State, 677 N.W.2d 414 (Minn. 2004) (second prong satisfied when recantation challenges multiple witnesses' testimony)
Caldwell v. State, 322 N.W.2d 574 (Minn. 1982) (Larrison framework adopted in Minnesota)
Martin v. State, — (Minn. 2013) (see above)