Daniels v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Daniels’ third motion for postconviction relief because his medical records were not newly discovered evidence and did not create a strong inference of actual innocence sufficient to overcome Rule 61’s procedural bars. The Court also denied Daniels’ requests for counsel, additional briefing, or remand because the recently decided constitutional-misconduct case he invoked had no bearing on records that were disclosed before trial and did not show that any State witness testified falsely.