Wickham v. Galetka

Summary

The Utah Supreme Court held that the State may appeal a final judgment granting post-conviction relief under Utah's Post-Conviction Remedies Act and Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 65C. The court concluded that newly discovered social-service records concerning the victim were merely impeachment evidence and did not justify a new trial. It also rejected alternative claims based on newly discovered eyewitness testimony and ineffective assistance of counsel, and reversed the order granting post-conviction relief.

Holdings

1. The State had a right to appeal the final judgment and order granting post-conviction relief.
2. The social-service and medical records were merely impeachment evidence and therefore could not support post-conviction relief under the Act.
3. Neither witness's proposed testimony independently satisfied the statutory requirements for newly discovered evidence warranting post-conviction relief.
4. Wickham failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the State had a right to appeal a final judgment granting post-conviction relief and ordering a new trial.
2. Whether the social-service and medical records constituted newly discovered evidence that was not merely impeachment evidence under Utah's Post-Conviction Remedies Act.
3. Whether testimony from Danny Pliego and Anthony Anderson independently satisfied the statutory requirements for newly discovered evidence warranting post-conviction relief.
4. Whether Wickham was entitled to post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

Disposition

reversed