860 N.W.2d 681
Minn.2015Background
- In June 2006 James Roberts was shot and killed; police later linked a gun to Leonard Slaughter and investigated associates including De-Aunteze Bobo.
- Samuel James initially told police Bobo admitted involvement and testified to that in a grand jury, but at trial James recanted and claimed Bobo was innocent; the State introduced James’s grand-jury testimony and Bobo was convicted of first-degree murder.
- Bobo’s conviction and direct appeal were unsuccessful; he later filed multiple postconviction petitions claiming newly discovered evidence.
- Third petition: affidavits from D.T. and J.C. alleging James had confessed to them; the postconviction court originally denied without a hearing but this court remanded for a hearing as the alleged confession could be admissible.
- Fourth petition: affidavit from J.L. claiming he witnessed the murder and Bobo was not present.
- At the postconviction evidentiary hearing James did not confess; D.T. and J.L. testified but the court found both not credible and denied both petitions for failing the materiality prong of the Rainer test.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the postconviction court abused its discretion by denying relief based on newly discovered evidence (third petition) | Bobo: D.T.’s testimony about James’s out-of-court confession is newly discovered, noncumulative, admissible, and would likely produce acquittal | State: D.T.’s testimony is not credible, cumulative/hearsay, and fails materiality under Rainer | Court: No abuse of discretion; postconviction court’s credibility finding for D.T. was not clearly erroneous, so Rainer’s materiality prong fails |
| Whether the postconviction court abused its discretion by denying relief based on J.L.’s affidavit (fourth petition) | Bobo: J.L. witnessed the murder and would exculpate Bobo, satisfying Rainer | State: J.L.’s testimony is not credible and thus not material | Court: No abuse of discretion; postconviction court reasonably found J.L. not credible and denied relief |
| Standard of proof applied | Bobo: Postconviction court required clear-and-convincing proof (argued) | State: Preponderance applies for Rainer; statutory standard is stricter but inapplicable here | Court: Preponderance standard was applied to the Rainer test; any reference to clear-and-convincing pertained to a different statutory standard and was not dispositive |
| Admissibility of James’s alleged confession under hearsay exception (Rule 804(b)(3)) | Bobo: Independent corroboration (cell phone, Spreigl evidence) satisfied Rule 804(b)(3) | State: Lacked required corroboration; hearsay exception inapplicable | Court: Did not decide because credibility/materiality failure was dispositive; did not reach the hearsay issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Rainer v. State, 566 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. 1997) (four-part test for newly discovered evidence)
- Bowles v. State, 530 N.W.2d 521 (Minn. 1995) (granting a new trial on newly discovered evidence rests in court's discretion)
- Race v. State, 504 N.W.2d 214 (Minn. 1993) (newly discovered evidence must be credible to meet materiality)
- Miles v. State, 840 N.W.2d 195 (Minn. 2013) (trial/postconviction court is best positioned to judge witness credibility)
- Ali v. State, 855 N.W.2d 235 (Minn. 2014) (appellate review of credibility findings is for clear-error)