Witness Recantations Central to Fight for New Hearing in Philip Vance Case

Philip Vance was convicted in 2004 and sentenced to life in prison for the robbery and fatal shooting of Sabreens Market clerk Khaled Al-Bakri in South St. Paul. Vance has consistently maintained his innocence. Over the past two decades, he has filed multiple appeals and post-conviction petitions challenging his conviction. His current petition relies heavily on witness recantations, claims of ineffective counsel, and alleged constitutional violations.

A Dakota County judge heard arguments Wednesday morning on whether Philip Vance is entitled to an evidentiary hearing as part of his fifth petition for post-conviction relief, a legal step that could allow new testimony and evidence to be examined in court.

After hearing arguments from both sides, Judge Michael Mayer said he is taking the matter under advisement and will issue a written order at a later time. No decision was announced in court.

If the judge grants the request, an evidentiary hearing would allow witness testimony, cross-examination, and judicial review of disputed evidence. If denied, the petition could be dismissed without further proceedings.

Defense Argues Hearing Is Required

Philp Vance’s attorney, Nico Ratkowski, argued that Minnesota law requires a hearing unless the court can conclusively determine Vance is not entitled to relief based solely on written filings.

Ratkowski told the court that Vance submitted extensive supporting evidence, including 12 affidavits — seven of which involve witnesses recanting their trial testimony. Some affidavits also allege law enforcement coercion during the original investigation. Ratkowski argued that questions about witness credibility cannot legally be resolved without testimony in open court.

The defense also argued that many of the affidavits qualify as newly discovered evidence and therefore are not barred by statutory time limits. Ratkowski noted that Vance filed his petition in December 2022 within two years of several key affidavits being obtained.

State Opposes Further Review

Assistant Dakota County Attorney Cheri Townsend urged the court to deny the request, arguing that Vance’s claims are barred by procedural rules and have already been raised — or should have been raised — in previous appeals and post-conviction petitions.

Townsend cited the Minnesota legal standard known as the Knaffla rule, which limits claims that can be brought after a direct appeal if they were previously known or could have been discovered earlier. The State also argued that several affidavits supporting Vance’s petition involve alleged alibi witnesses whose testimony, prosecutors say, would have been known to Vance at the time of his trial more than two decades ago.

Prosecutors further relied on a four-year-long investigation conducted by the Minnesota Attorney General’s Conviction Review Unit (CRU), which concluded there was insufficient reliable evidence to support overturning Vance’s conviction. Townsend told the court that the CRU reviewed witness recantations and other claims but found them unreliable or unlikely to change the outcome of the case. She also raised concerns cited in the CRU report suggesting some recantations could have been influenced by outside pressure or financial incentives.

If a hearing is granted, scheduling and next procedural steps will follow. If denied, Vance’s latest attempt at post-conviction relief could be dismissed.