DETROIT LAKES, Minn. — With the Minnesota Senate split 33-33 between Democrats and Republicans, DFL Sen. Nicole Mitchell’s attorneys argued this week that it will be hard for their client to get a fair trial in her burglary case.
The Woodbury lawmaker’s defense team says the situation at the Capitol has changed dramatically since the case was set for trial.
“Why does this matter?” wrote attorney Dane DeKrey in a motion to postpone the Becker County trial. “Because these developments further escalate an already ratcheted-up trial so much so that its fairness is unnecessarily put in jeopardy. There’s no doubt this case was always going to have political implications. But the ones envisioned when the trial was scheduled are a far cry from those now present. And they turn up the pressure-cooker to a temperature so dangerous that it’s wrong to try the case now. This case isn’t about politics. But without a continuance, it runs the real risk of becoming about politics,” he wrote.
Nicole Mitchell (Courtesy of the Becker County Sheriff’s Office)
With the Senate tied 33-33 after the death of Sen. Kari Dziedzic, DFL-Minneapolis, Mitchell’s absence would give Republicans a momentary majority in the Senate.
Mitchell was charged with felony first-degree burglary after police found her in her stepmother’s Detroit Lakes home in the early morning hours of April 22, 2024. Mitchell’s attorneys had requested that her Tuesday hearing be conducted remotely so she could attend the first day of the legislative session, a request the judge granted.
According to court records, Mitchell explained that her father had recently died and that her stepmother had ceased all contact with her and other family members. Mitchell said she wanted some belongings of her father’s and that her stepmother refused to give them to her. She described them as pictures, a flannel shirt, ashes, and other items of sentimental value.
According to Becker County Dispatch transcripts of the 911 call, Mitchell’s stepmother “tripped over” the intruder, who “was on the floor next to my bed,” before the intruder fled to the basement.
Her trial is set to start Jan. 27, but she has asked that it be delayed until the first available date after May 19, when the legislative session will be over.
Prosecution asks that trial go forward
At a Tuesday hearing Becker County Attorney Brian McDonald, who is prosecuting the case, asked the court to move forward with the original trial date.
“Justice delayed is justice denied,” he told Becker County District Judge Michael D. Fritz. “We haven’t heard the word ‘victim’ yet in the 20 papers filed and the 15-some minutes (the defense) has been speaking.”
The political landscape in St. Paul is not “good cause” to delay the trial, McDonald said, “nor should it trump the victim’s right to have timely justice in their case.”
McDonald earlier filed a speedy trial demand on behalf of Mitchell’s stepmother.
State statute
The defense motion to postpone the trial cites Minnesota Statute 3.16 , a rarely used law that, among other things, appears to allow a state lawmaker to postpone their civil or criminal trial until after the legislative session.
On Tuesday, McDonald argued that the statute “was never meant to shield a political criminal defendant from timely justice — she put herself in this situation on her own time in the last legislative session — it has no ties to her role as a legislator.”
He noted that “this is a ‘person’ crime — other such ‘person’ crimes include murder and criminal sexual conduct. Would this court allow a political defendant charged with one of those offenses to delay a case?”
McDonald questioned whether the defense request for an extended delay is designed to take advantage of the victim’s Alzheimer’s diagnosis.
Defense responds
DeKrey rebutted that charge.
“We take great issue with the state’s claim that the motion is a defense attempt to run out the clock on an Alzheimer’s victim,” he said at the hearing on Tuesday. “That’s not what this is about.” To alleviate those concerns, he offered to allow the stepmother to record depositions now to be used later at trial.
In a 16-page motion, the defense refuted the state’s argument that the case puts Statute 3.16 in direct conflict with the rules of criminal procedure, which trump the statute:
“That’s an incorrect reading of Rule 11.09(b),” the defense argued, “which states that ‘on demand of any party after entry of such a plea (for a speedy trial), the trial must start within 60 days unless the court finds good cause for a later trial date.’ It’s as if the state forgot to read this italicized part before filing its brief, as the invocation of 3.16 is precisely the type of good cause that permits a court to sidestep the 60-day trial deadline.”
The defense motion also raised the specter of “the runaway juror,” who hides their political biases.
In short, a runaway juror “want(s) to influence the outcome of the trial,” the defense argued. “And while this is always a risk in any criminal trial, it’s even greater now. Prospective jurors will know, or run the real risk of finding out before or during trial, that their decision in the case may literally flip the balance of power in state government. The Court shouldn’t accept such an unnecessary risk. Nicole’s guilt or innocence shouldn’t possibly be compromised by a runaway juror who is more concerned with partisanship than their oath.”
If the trial is not postponed, the defense further argued, ”the eyes of the entire state will be upon the Becker County courthouse. That means reporters, partisans, and even elected officials. Rumors often swirl in St. Paul, but if even any part of them are true, there seems a real possibility that the trial risks being inundated by the hyper-partisanship currently plaguing the state Capitol.”
That would hurt Mitchell’s chance at a fair trial, but also would be bad “for the jurors who will eventually be seated in this case. Their lives shouldn’t be upended and scrutinized in the way that’s likely going to occur unless there is no other choice,” the defense argued.
Other arguments
Among other arguments for delaying the trial, the defense motion promises an immediate appeal if the trial is ordered to continue as scheduled.
Because the case appears to have special circumstances and involve an important, unsettled area of the law, “there’s a good chance Nicole’s trial will need to get continued from its current date so the Court of Appeals, and depending on its ruling perhaps even the Minnesota Supreme Court, can weigh in,” the defense said in its motion. “In short, Nicole’s counsel believes it has an absolute ethical obligation to exhaust all appellate remedies related to this issue before turning back to the merits of the case. And there’s almost certainly no way this occurs before Nicole’s current trial date. So for this reason, too, a continuance is appropriate.”
At the end of the hearing, Judge Fritz said “this court will follow the law,” and will issue an opinion on the request to continue the trial “sooner rather than later — I know we have a trial scheduled for Jan. 27 here.”
Related Articles
U.S. attorney Andrew Luger resigns ahead of transfer of power in Washington
Judge upholds election results in missing ballots case in Shakopee House 54A District
Minnesota House Republicans elect speaker as DFL colleagues boycott session
MN House power sharing dispute could mean rough start for 2025 legislative session
Minnesota’s human services commissioner will step down next month
Leave a Reply