Cited by

“The petitioner’s allegations must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

d 178, 190 n.19 (Minn. 2021); (concluding that “trial counsel’s performance was professionally reasonable” because the “alleged error[] include[d] failure to present to the jury evidence that someone else committed the murders,” which “relate[s] to ma tters of trial strategy, not errors in professional performance”).

.W.2d 155, 165 (Minn. 2009) (noting that whether to cross -examine witness was a matter of trial strategy that could not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel ); (noting that failure to investigate and failure to call a witness were matters of trial strategy and could not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel); Hodgson v. State , (noting that failure to present alternative perpetrator evidence and failure to investigate leads were matters of trial strategy and could not constitute

See Carridine, d at 494 (determining trial strategy includes determining which witnesses to call at trial) ; 14 (determining that selecting the evidence to present to the jury is trial strategy); Andersen, d at 10 (determining the extent of an attorney’s investigation is trial strategy); d 515, 518 (Minn. 1995) (noting defense counsel’s decision not to investigate leads and not have evidence independently tested was trial strategy).

4 in [commitment] and that must be resolved in order to determine the issues raised on the merits.”

Moreover, allegations in a postconvic tion petition are required to be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

Hodgson v. State , , 517 (Minn. 1995).

hold a hearing “[u]nless the petition and th e files and records of the proceeding conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” “An evidentiary hearing is required whenever material facts are in dispute that have not been resolved in the proceedings resulting in conviction and that must be resolved in order to determine the issues raised on the merits.”

(“The petitioner’s allegations must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.”) (quotation omitted).

But a llegations in a postconviction petition must be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

However, allegations in a postconviction petition must be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

However, a llegations in a postconviction petition must be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

(newly discovered evidence (1) must not be within petitioner’s or counsel’s knowledge before trial, (2) could not have been “discovered through due diligence before trial,” (3) is not “cumulative, impeaching, or doubtful,” (4) would likely produce a more favorable result at trial).

“The petitioner’s allegations must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

Because a “petitioner’s allegations must [present] ‘more than argumentative assertions without factual support,’ ” (quoting Beltowski v. State, 289 Minn. 215, 217, ), we decline to consider Fairbanks’s additional claims.

“The petitioner’s allegations must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

(requiring appellant’s allegations to be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support” (quoting Beltowski v. State, 289 Minn. 215, 217, )).

(“The petitioner’s allegations must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.”(citation omitted)).

Similarly, in Hodgson v. State, we noted that a postconviction “petitioner’s allegations must be ‘more than argumentative assertions without factual support.’ ” (quoting Beltowski v. State, 289 Minn. 215, 217 , ).

The claims made within the petition “must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

(rejecting arguments that trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to present an alternative-perpetrator defense or pursue leads because they “relate to matters of trial strategy”).

The allegations “must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.” (quotation omitted).

ntiary hearing is not necessary if the petition does not allege facts “which, if proved, would entitle a petitioner to the requested relief.” (affirming the postconviction court’s finding that vague allegations that trial counsel coached a witness and improperly dealt with evidence were too general to require a hearing); (affirming denial of relief without a hearing because petition “largely rest[ed] on unsupported assertions”).

conviction petition, however, provides insufficient support for Bahtuoh’s assertions, and Bahtuoh concedes that the trial transcripts contain “nothing indicating any of this.” We have long held that “[a]lle-gations in a postconviction petition ‘must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.’ ” ().

constitutes trial strategy); Bobo, d at 138-39 ; (“When determining whether alleged failure to investigate constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel, we consider whether the decision was based on trial strategy or whether it demonstrated that counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness”); (noting that defense counsel’s decision not to present evidence that someone else may have committed the murder and not to investigate leads was trial strategy).

We have long held that “[a]lle-gations in a postconviction petition ‘must be more than argumentative assertions without factual support.’ ” ().

Appellant has the burden of alleging facts that, if proven, entitle him to relief, and a petition may be denied if the petitioner’s allegations are no more than “ ‘argumentative assertions without factual support.’ ” Davis, d at 392 ().

Allegations in a postconviction petition must be “more than argumentative assertions without factual support.”