829 N.W.2d 400
Minn.2013Background
- Thoms died February 25–26, 2005 by drowning; semen matching Tscheu’s DNA was found in Thoms’ rectum.
- Tscheu was convicted of first‑degree murder while committing first‑degree criminal sexual conduct, and sentenced to life.
- On direct appeal, the conviction was affirmed (State v. Tscheu, 758 N.W.2d 849 (Minn. 2008)).
- In 2009, Tscheu sought postconviction relief on a newly discovered evidence claim; the postconviction court found the evidence not credible and unlikely to help; the denial was affirmed on appeal.
- New evidence involved A.C.’s affidavits/testimony and a stepson’s letter/affidavit; credibility issues centered on inconsistent timelines and competing narratives.
- The court upheld credibility determinations and held no abuse of discretion in denying postconviction relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility and materiality of newly discovered evidence | Tscheu argues evidence is credible and could yield a more favorable result | State argues evidence is unreliable and conflictual, unlikely to change outcome | No abuse of discretion; evidence not credible and unlikely to yield favorable result |
| Whether inconsistencies in new evidence invalidate credibility findings | AC’s testimony conflicts with affidavits and stepson’s statements | Inconsistencies support lack of credibility, justifying denial | Record supports credibility findings; inconsistencies undermine chance of acquittal |
| Whether A.C.’s testimony would place M.H. at Starbuck during Thoms’ death | A.C. testimony could place M.H. away from Thoms’ death window | Trial evidence ties M.H. to events; conflicting with time of death | A.C.’s testimony conflicts with trial timing; not likely to change outcome |
| Timeliness under postconviction rules (Knaffla/conflict with direct appeal) | Claim may be timely despite direct appeal; merits reviewed on the record | Rule bars new claims that could have been raised on direct appeal | Claims addressed on merits; stepson affidavit claim considered on the merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Race v. State, 504 N.W.2d 214 (Minn. 1993) (credibility of new, conflicting evidence must be credible)
- Bowles v. State, 530 N.W.2d 521 (Minn. 1995) (recantation must be credible and likely to affect outcome)
- Fort v. State, 768 N.W.2d 335 (Minn. 2009) (new evidence lacking credibility not likely to produce result favorable to petitioner)
- Wayne v. State, 498 N.W.2d 446 (Minn. 1993) (courts defer to credibility determinations when evaluating new evidence)
- Evans v. State, 756 N.W.2d 854 (Minn. 2008) (definitive assessment of credibility required for relief)