Opsahl v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that relief was unavailable in part because some recanting witnesses “reversed any recantation they may have made” and others “claim[ed] merely that they did not give a full explanation of their testimony at trial”
• noting that “a simple statement contradicting earlier testimony” does not satisfy the first prong of Larrison
• stating that “a simple statement contradicting earlier testimony” fails to meet the first prong of the test for recanted testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).