Derek Chauvin’s lawyer seeks new trial

5 4 21 chauvintrial ap 773

A request for a new trial is routine following a responsible verdict and infrequently mirrors points that can be raised on enchantment, mentioned Mike Brandt, a Minneapolis protection lawyer who has been carefully following the case. If this request is denied, it may well add one other layer of choices for Nelson to enchantment. Brandt and others have mentioned Chauvin’s convictions are unlikely to be overturned.

Nelson cited many causes in his request for a new trial. He mentioned Choose Peter Cahill abused the discretion of the court docket and violated Chauvin’s proper to due course of and a good trial when he denied Nelson’s request to maneuver the trial to a different county as a result of pretrial publicity.

He additionally mentioned Cahill abused his discretion when he denied an earlier request for a new trial based mostly on publicity through the proceedings, which Nelson mentioned threatened the equity of the trial. Nelson mentioned that publicity included “intimidation” of the protection professional witness, which he mentioned may have a “far-reaching chilling impact” on the flexibility of defendants to get professional witnesses in high-profile instances, together with the upcoming instances of the three different former officers charged in Floyd’s loss of life.

“The publicity right here was so pervasive and so prejudicial earlier than and through this trial that it amounted to a structural defect within the proceedings,” Nelson wrote.

Nelson additionally took subject with Cahill’s refusal to sequester the jury for the trial or warn them to keep away from all media, and together with his refusal to permit a person who was with Floyd on the time of his arrest to testify.

Nelson mentioned Cahill additionally abused his discretion when he submitted jury directions that Nelson mentioned did not precisely replicate the legislation on the homicide prices and use of power, permitted the state to current cumulative proof on use of power, and ordered the state to guide witnesses on direct examination, amongst different issues.

Nelson additionally requested the choose for a listening to to question the decision on the grounds that the jury dedicated misconduct, felt race-based stress, felt intimidated or threatened, and/or failed to stick to jury directions, although the submitting didn’t embrace particulars about that assertion. To question a verdict is to query its validity.

The temporary didn’t point out current stories that one of many jurors participated in an Aug. 28 march in Washington, D.C., to honor Martin Luther King, Jr.

That juror, Brandon Mitchell, has defended his actions, saying the occasion was to commemorate the 1963 March on Washington and was not a protest over Floyd’s loss of life. Floyd’s brother and sister, Philonise and Bridgett Floyd, and kin of others who had been shot by police addressed the group on the march final summer season.

Nelson didn’t instantly return a message looking for particulars about his allegation of juror misconduct.

Brandt mentioned Nelson will possible file extra detailed written arguments on these points. The aim of holding a listening to to question the decision could be to develop a factual document and current proof that might decide whether or not the decision was compromised. If a listening to is granted, it’s possible Mitchell could be known as in to reply questions, Brandt mentioned.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button