CRIMINAL – CR 60.02: Stoker v. Commonwealth (COA 3/27/2009)

Stoker v. Commonwealth
2009 WL 792730

Opinion by Judge Caperton; Judges Dixon and VanMeter concurred. The Court affirmed an order of the circuit court denying appellant’s pro se CR 60.02 motion.

The Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it first undertook analysis under CR 60.02(f) and found that the motion was not raised in a reasonable time and then undertook a second analysis under CR 60.02(b) and found that appellant’s newly discovered evidence claim was brought outside the one-year time limit.

The Court also held appellant failed to state for a claim for relief under CR 60.02 when he failed to allege with specificity how the Commonwealth wrongfully obtained his conviction through the use of a satanic ritual abuse sham.

The Court finally held that the trial court did not err in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing. First, RCr 10.26 was inapplicable in review of a decision under CR 60.02. Second, appellant failed to affirmatively allege facts to justify relief and therefore a hearing was not required.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.