Ricky Darnell Waiters, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent
Supreme Court of Minnesota
When the record does not disclose the basis for a district court’s decision to summarily deny postconviction relief, reversal and remand is necessary because this court cannot determine whether the district court considered the petitioner’s claims for relief. Reversed and remanded. Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.
1Opinion of the Court
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A23-1863 County of Winona Procaccini, J. Ricky Darnell Waiters, Appellant, vs. Filed: December 11, 2024 Office of Appellate Courts State of Minnesota, Respondent. ________________________ Ricky Darnell Waiters, Rush City, Minnesota, pro se. Keith Ellison, Attorney General, Saint Paul, Minnesota; and Karin Leonard Sonneman, Winona County Attorney, Winona, Minnesota, for respondent. ________________________ SYLLABUS When the record does not disclose the basis for a district court’s decision to summarily deny postconviction relief, reversal and remand is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Day v. McDonoughSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- State v. SorensonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Scruggs v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Hooper v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
- State v. CurtissCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.