Haas v. Commonwealth, 721 S.E.2d 479

Haas was convicted in 1994 by bench trial in Powhatan County for sodomy of his two sons (ages 11 and 9) and sentenced to life in each case.
Appellate and state habeas proceedings followed; prior appeals denied.
In 2000 Haas’s habeas petition was dismissed as time-barred; this Court affirmed.
On May 11, 2010 Haas filed a petition for a writ of actual innocence under Code § 19.2-327.10 based on non-biological evidence, including recantations and medical affidavits.
The Court of Appeals denied referral for an evidentiary hearing and dismissed the petition; the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ denial, upholding the decision not to remand.
The governing statutory framework provides that the Court of Appeals has broad discretion to decide based on the record and may remand for an evidentiary hearing if warranted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Court of Appeals abused its discretion by not remanding for an evidentiary hearing	Haas contends the Court should have referred for an evidentiary hearing	Commonwealth argues no abuse; record adequately resolves issue	No abuse; discretion properly exercised
Whether the petition satisfied Code § 19.2-327.11 by alleging newly discovered, material, non-cumulative evidence	Haas asserts recantations and affidavits meet criteria	Commonwealth contends evidence not newly discovered or sufficiently material	Satisfied failure to show true material new evidence; petition denied
Whether the recantations and physician affidavits were credible and could undermine trial record under this chapter	Haas relies on recantations and medical affidavits	Commonwealth undermines credibility and weight of recantations; affidavits cumulate	Court weighed record; did not find recantations credible to overturn conviction
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly recognized its authority to decide evidentiary issues on the record	Haas argues need for circuit court credibility evaluation	Court has original jurisdiction and may rely on record evidence	Court properly exercised authority on the record without remand

Dobbert v. Wainwright, 468 U.S. 1231 (1984) (recantations viewed with great suspicion; credibility concerns in child abuse cases)
Carpitcher v. Commonwealth, 273 Va. 335, 641 S.E.2d 486 (2007) (recantation evidence must be true to be material under §19.2-327.11(A))
Turner v. Commonwealth, 282 Va. 227, 717 S.E.2d 111 (2011) (Court of Appeals has broad discretion to require or forego development of facts)
Johnson v. Commonwealth, 273 Va. 315, 641 S.E.2d 480 (2007) (discusses discretion and factual development in §19.2-327 proceedings)
United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617 (8th Cir. 1992) (recantations concerns; credibility considerations)