Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A07-176 Hennepin County State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Tony M. Caine, Appellant. Filed: March 27, 2008 Office of Appellate Courts Anderson, Paul H., J.
Concurring, Gildea, J., Anderson, Russell A., C.J.

Took no part, Dietzen, J.

S Y LL A B U S The district court did not err when it concluded that the guilty plea transcript of a witness whom the court found was feigning memory loss at trial was admissible under Minn. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(A). The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendants request to reopen his case in order to re-cross-examine a State witness about a guilty plea transcript that was admitted before defendant presented his case-in-chief. The district court committed error when it gave the jury an instruction on duress that did not explicitly state that the States burden of proof to disprove duress was beyond a reasonable doubt, but the error did not constitute plain error or affect defendants substantial rights because the instructions explicitly indicated that the State had the

1

burden to disprove duress and because the instructions as a whole made clear that the State must prove every element of the offenses, including intent, beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury had sufficient evidence to find that defendant intentionally shot the victim and was not acting under duress. The district court did not err when it denied defendants request to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of first-degree manslaughter under Minn. Stat.

Download A07-176, State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Tony M. Caine, Appellant..pdf

Minnesota Law