Legal Opinion

State v. Ieng

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 8, 1997No. 38204-7-IPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCox, J.

A person who is convicted of a crime is not entitled to a new trial solely because a key prosecution witness recants important trial testimony. If the recantation is not credible, then it is not material, and an essential factor that would support a new trial is missing. Here, Kea Ieng, who was convicted of first degree murder, fails to show that the trial court abused its discretion by deciding, under the totality of the circumstances, that the testimony of the recanting witness was not credible. Accordingly, we affirm.

In January 1991, Kea Ieng shot and killed Him Chhom just outside the Ieng…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. SwanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 1981
  3. State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. MaconWashington Supreme Court · 1996

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  2. State v. WestWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State v. WestWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. State v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  5. In Re SpencerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API