Gorman v. State
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KLAPHAKE, Judge
Michael Gorman appeals from the district court’s summary denial of his petition for postconviction relief in which he asserts that he is entitled to a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence and violation of discovery rules by the state. Because appellant has presented evidence that raises legitimate questions as to whether he is entitled to a new trial, we reverse and remand to allow the district court an opportunity to hold an evi-dentiary hearing and make findings to support the grant or denial of postconviction relief.
FACTS
Appellant was charged with…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Strickler v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- State v. KnafflaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. FishCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Walen v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010