Alonzo Marshall Has vehemently challenged his guilt throughout these proceeding because he was not involved in the death of Michael Henry. Even thoughMarshall contested his guilt, he was convicted at trial. In the instant action, the issue is whether the court of appeals erred in affirming the trial courts decision to deny his section 23-110 following an evidentiary hearing. That is, in affirming the trial court the Court of Appeals determined that there was no abuse of discretion in in finding that the witness called was not credible. Did the court below err in affirming the trial court where there is no evidence that Marshall's witness has reason to mislead the court where innocence is onthe table?

Whether the court of appeals erred in affirming the trial court's decision to deny the defendant's Section 23-110 motion following an evidentiary hearing