Preview:

Henry L. Patterson, petitioner, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent. C6-03-247, Supreme Court, October 23, 2003.

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT C6-03-247

Hennepin County Anderson, Russell A., J.

Henry L. Patterson, petitioner, Appellant, Filed: October 23, 2003 Office of Appellate Courts State of Minnesota, Respondent.

SYLLABUS 1. On review of a postconviction court's denial without evidentiary hearing of a petition for

postconviction relief, any doubts about whether an evidentiary hearing is required are to be resolved in favor of the petitioner; yet if the petition, files and record conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief, an evidentiary hearing is not required. 2. Petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails the prejudice prong of Strickland v.

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984),and the postconviction court did not err by denying the claim without an evidentiary hearing. 3. Petitioner's allegations regarding jurisdiction are mere argumentative assertions without any factual

support and, therefore, an evidentiary hearing is not required. Affirmed. Considered and decided by the court en banc without oral argument. OPINION ANDERSON, Russell A., Justice. Henry Laverne Patterson was found guilty, following a jury trial, of first-degree premeditated murder for the death of three people and on direct appeal we affirmed. State v. Patterson, 587 N.W.2d 45 (Minn. 1998). In 2002, Patterson petitioned for postconviction relief, alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at trial and also alleging that the trial court was without jurisdiction because "various elements of the offense were not charged in

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/op030247-1023.htm[4/16/2013 8:42:44 PM]

Henry L. Patterson, petitioner, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent. C6-03-247, Supreme Court, October 23, 2003.

the complaint, or found by the jury."

He also claimed that he was denied access to the trial record. The

postconviction court, without an evidentiary hearing, denied Patterson's petition and we affirm. On review of a postconviction court's denial without an evidentiary hearing of a petition for postconviction relief, we resolve any doubts about whether an evidentiary hearing is required in favor of the petitioner; yet if the petition, files and record conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief, we will not require an evidentiary hearing. Minn. Stat.

Download op030247-1023.pdf

Minnesota Law