Minnesota Supreme Court Criminal Appeals Update—January 6, 2024
As of January 6, 2024, oral arguments have been held in the following cases and the supreme court’s opinions are pending:
Custody status point
In State v. Carter, 986 N.W.2d 7 (Minn. App. 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether district courts should assign a custody-status point when the defendant received a stay of adjudication on a prior offense and was on probation for that offense when the defendant committed the current offense. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 11, 2023.
Postconviction review; false testimony
In Kaiser v. State, N0. A22-0749, 2023 WL 1945553 (Minn. App. Feb. 13, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review of two issues. First, to determine whether the Minnesota Court of Appeals erred when it held that the Larrison test for false testimony applies to inaccurate expert medical testimony. Second, the supreme court granted review to determine whether the postconviction court abused its discretion when it granted Kaiser a new trial based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The postconviction court found trial counsel was ineffective for failing to consult with experts who could have refuted the trial testimony of the State’s expert witnesses. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 7, 2023.
In Gilbert v. State, 982 N.W.2d 763 (Minn. App. 2022), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to decide two issues. First, whether State v. Knaffla, 243 N.W.2d 737 (Minn. 1976) applies when a postconviction court finds that fairness required consideration of claims within a postconviction petition. Second, whether the court of appeals properly applied the Larrison test for false testimony. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 7, 2023.
Legally inconsistent verdicts; postconviction review; false evidence standard
In Tichich v. State, 989 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. App. 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether the rule articulated in State v. Noggle, 881 N.W.2d 545 (Minn. 2016) means the crimes of attempt and completion are mutually exclusive. Specifically, whether guilty verdicts for attempted third-degree criminal sexual conduct and completed third-degree criminal sexual conduct are legal inconsistent. The court also granted review to consider the application of the false evidence standard under Larrison in postconviction proceedings. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on November 8, 2023.
Statutory interpretation; mens rea; controlled substance crime
In State v. Lehman, 985 N.W.2d 365 (Minn. App. 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to decide whether the State is required to prove that a defendant knew the person was under 18 years of age to convict the defendant of knowingly permitting a “child” to ingest methamphetamine under Minnesota Statutes section 152.137, subdivision 2(b). Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 13, 2023.
Validity of guilty pleas
In State v. Jones, No. A21-1713, 2023 WL 125857 (Minn. App. Jan. 9, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether a guilty plea is valid if the defendant asserted innocence and the factual basis was solicited through leading questions. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 10, 2023.
Restitution awards
In State v. Allison, No. 22-0793, 2023 WL 125824 (Minn. App. Jan. 9, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether, in a case involving a child-victim, a parent’s lost wages and therapy costs are directly caused by the charged crime and therefore recoverable as restitution. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 6, 2023.
In State v. Cummings, A22-0630, 2023 WL 2467901 (Minn. App. Mar. 13, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether district courts can consider a defendant’s house as a resource when ordering restitution when the defendant’s house is co-owned by a spouse. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 2, 2023.
Exception to the confrontation clause; unavailability requirement
In State v. Trifiletti, 980 N.W.2d 357 (Minn. 2022), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine if a witness was constitutionally unavailable to testify because the witness was potentially exposed to COVID-19. The district court determined that the witness was unavailable and allowed the State to introduce a transcript of the witness’ prior testimony. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 11, 2023.
Imposition of lifetime conditional release; indictments
In State v. Snyder, 984 N.W.2d 590 (Minn. App. 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 17.01, subdivision 1 requires the State to charge a defendant by indictment to authorize the imposition of lifetime conditional release. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 5, 2023.
Zone of privacy; upward departure
In State v. Vanengen, 983 N.W.2d 479 (Minn. App. 2022), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to decide whether a defendant’s conduct justifies an upward durational departure based on a violation of the victim’s zone of privacy when a criminal sexual conduct offense involving a sleeping complainant takes place in the bedroom, which is an area where such offenses usually occur. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 9, 2023.
Fourth Amendment; search of a lawyer’s office
In State v. McNeilly, A22-0468, 2022 WL 17747792 (Minn. App. Dec. 19, 2022), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether the search of an attorney’s office and computers when the attorney is a subject of a criminal investigation is constitutionally unreasonable where law enforcement took no steps to protect the attorney-client and work-product privileges and the search warrants failed to particularly describe the items to be seized. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 11, 2023.
Riot; definition of “dangerous weapon”
In State v. Abdus-Salam, 988 N.W.2d 493 (Minn. App. 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine (1) whether there was sufficient probable cause to support a second-degree riot with a dangerous weapon charge where the defendant organized “intersection takeovers” that blocked traffic; and (2) whether a car constitutes a dangerous weapon under the riot statute. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 30, 2023.
Riot; mens rea; “dangerous weapon;” multiple convictions under Minn. Stat. § 609.04
In State v. Bradley, A22-0960, 2023 WL 2962250 (Minn. App. Apr. 17, 2023), the supreme court granted review to determine the manner-of-use definition of a dangerous weapon includes a knowledge element with respect to potential harms and, if so, whether that requires application of the circumstantial evidence standard of review. The court also granted review to determine whether Minnesota Statutes section 609.04 permits two convictions for a single assault even if one of the charged statutes is not assigned a numerical “degree.” Oral argument was held before the supreme court on October 30, 2023.
Warrant requirement; good faith exception;.
In State v. Malecha, A22-1314, 2023 WL 2359622 (Minn. App. Mar. 6, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether the good faith exception applies where law enforcement incorrectly believed that a warrant was still active. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on September 12, 2023.
Threats of violence; admissibility of evidence
In State v. Maye, A22-0316, 2023 WL 276762 (Minn. App. Apr. 3, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether evidence of anonymous threats is admissible when there is no link between the defendant and the threats, the witness is not reluctant to testify, and the witness does not alter the testimony from previous statements to the police. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on December 12, 2023.
Criminal contempt of court
In State v. Oberton, A22-1727, 2023 WL 3296138 (Minn. App. May 8, 2023), the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review to determine whether a district court is required to make findings of extraordinarily severe contemptuous behavior before imposing a 180-day sentence when the ordinary sanction is limited to 90 days. The court also granted review to determine whether directing profanities at a judge constitutes extraordinarily severe contemptuous behavior. Oral argument was held before the supreme court on December 4, 2023.
