Opinion ID: 1306424
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: new trial on grounds of newly discovered evidence

Text: 8. We come then to the final and we think one of the important claims of the defendant, namely, that the trial court should have granted his motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. After the conviction of defendant and the subsequent conviction of Mastrian, Anderson entered a plea of guilty to murder in the first degree. He, together with Thompson and Mastrian, was incarcerated in the Stillwater prison. The other witnesses linking Thompson to the crime Morris, Sharp, Ingram, and Butlerafter having been kept in jail for over a year on one charge or another, were all released after the two cases were over. Morris, who was charged with being an accessory after the fact, entered a plea of guilty and the sentence was suspended, with probation for 5 years. Ingram, who entered a plea of guilty to robbery in the first degree, was sentenced, and his sentence suspended. Sharp was held on a charge of burglary in the third degree but the charge was dismissed on motion of the county attorney. Butler was permitted to plead guilty of attempted robbery in the first degree and a 10-year sentence imposed was stayed and he was placed on probation. Anderson, who insisted, even to the end, that he understood he was to be permitted to plead guilty to murder in the second degree and that he would not have to serve over 5 or 6 years, finally entered a plea of guilty to murder in the first degree. After an appeal had been perfected to this court by defendant, prison authorities found on the person of Anderson a partially completed letter addressed to the governor of Minnesota and the chief justice of the supreme court, in which he repudiated his entire testimony at the trial and completely exonerated Thompson and Mastrian. Anderson was thoroughly examined at the prison by counsel for defendant and under oath reiterated what he had stated in this letter. He stated that Thompson and Mastrian had nothing to do with the crime but that it was the result of an attempted burglary by him alone. Shortly thereafter he was removed from Stillwater prison and we remanded the case to the trial court for hearing as to whether a new trial should be granted on the ground of newly discovered evidence. At the full hearing, in which Anderson was examined and cross-examined, he then repudiated the statement made at the prison and testified that what he had said at the trial was true. His explanation was that threats had been made on his life by Mastrian in the prison and other threats had come to him from Thompson through other inmates of the prison, and that he wrote the letter and gave the statement to defendant's counsel under oath for fear that these threats would be carried out if he did not do so. It is apparent that Anderson has little regard for the truth and less for the sanctity of an oath. However, the trial court had an opportunity to observe him and to determine whether he was telling the truth at the trial and at the last hearing, or when he made his retraction in prison. We feel obliged to accept the determination of the trial court. There are discrepancies even in his latest statement, but in its essentials it does implicate Mastrian and, through him, Thompson in the commission of the crime. Defendant cites in support of this motion the cases of State v. Myers, 154 Minn. 242, 191 N.W. 597, involving repudiation of his testimony by a key witness; State v. Star, 248 Minn. 571, 81 N.W.2d 94, involving a confession and exoneration by a person who did not testify at the trial; State v. Warren, 252 Minn. 261, 89 N.W.2d 702, involving admission of mistaken identity; and State v. Bock, 229 Minn. 449, 39 N.W.2d 887, which involved a question again of mistaken identity and an admission by another person that he had committed crimes similar to that of which defendant was convicted. In none of these cases was there a subsequent retraction of the statements made which exonerated the defendant. That is not true here. The question here is whether Anderson told the truth at the trial and at the last hearing, or while in prison when he retracted what he had said at the trial. It may well be true that if another jury heard all of these statements they would be less likely to believe Anderson. It may also be true that if they knew of the treatment accorded Morris, Sharp, Ingram, and Butler they would discount their testimony on the grounds that they may have testified as they did as the result of promises of leniency. Be that as it may, we must take the record as we find it and, accepting the trial court's determination that Anderson fabricated the story told in prison and not at the trial, we cannot hold that the court erred in denying a new trial on the grounds of this newly discovered evidence. Affirmed. TERM INSURANCE POLICIES IN EFFECT ON CAROL THOMPSON'S LIFE WHEN SHE WAS MURDERED ON MARCH 6, 1963 [1] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local Agent Date of That Handled Amount of Premium Type of Expiration Application Application Company Insurance Paid Insurance Date ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Feb. 6, 1962 James Treanor Travelers Ins. Co. 100,000 plus $597.70 Term April 9, 1967 100,000 accidental death Feb. 14, 1962 James Treanor Travelers Ins. Co. 100,000 plus $547.70 Term April 9, 1967 50,000 accidental death April 4, 1962 James Treanor Accident Division of Travelers Ins. Co. 100,000 $110.00 Accident April 4, 1963 April 10, 1962 Floyd Peterson Time Ins. Co. 50,000 [2] $ 82.50 Accident May 1, 1963 April 10, 1962 Floyd Peterson Continental Cas. Co. 200,000 [3] $350.00 Accident April 10, 1963 April 12, 1962 James Treanor Lloyd's London 250,000 $312.50 Accident April 11, 1963 May 14, 1962 John Winter General Accident Co. 30,000 [4] $ 32.40 Accident June 1, 1963 May 21, 1962 John Winter Zurich Ins. Co. 25,000 [5] $ 38.75 Accident June 13, 1963 January, 1963 John Winter Continental Cas. Co. 50,000 $ 75.35 Accident March 15, 1963 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------