Supreme Court of Minnesota· 5/27/2004

Hooper v. State

Citations

680 N.W.2d 89
2004 Minn. LEXIS 293
2004 WL 1171378

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

affirming the postconviction court's decision not to hold an evidentiary hearing because the recanting witness's testimony was not pivotal
affirming the postconviction court’s decision not to hold an evidentiary hearing because the recanting witness’s testimony was not pivotal
affirming the postconviction court’s holding that second prong not met because “even without [the recanting witness’s] testimony, the strength of the other evidence presented at trial was such that the jury would not likely have reached a different conclusion”
“While removal is warranted when the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, a[n] [appellant’s] subjective belief that the judge is biased does not necessarily warrant removal.”
“While removal is warranted when the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, a[n] [appellant’s] subjective belief that the judge is biased does not necessarily warrant removal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Page

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.