NORGAARD Plea of Guilty (Unable To Recall) (10-16) (Replaced by 15-16)

QUESTION: WHAT IS A NORGAARD PLEA OF GUILTY? A Norgaard Plea is a procedure that governs situations where a defendant wants to enter a plea of guilty (usually in order to take advantage of a plea agreement) but is unable to recall facts due to intoxication or amnesia. Unlike an Alford plea, in a Norgaard Plea, Defendant does not make a claim he is innocent.

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE (Replaced by 15-16)

Pendleton10.16-NORGAARD_Plea_of_Guilty

Alford Plea of Guilty – Defendant Denies Guilt (10-15) Replaced by 14-18)

THIS UPDATE HAS BEEN REPLACED BY UPDATE 14-18

QUESTION:   What Is An ‘Alford’ Plea Of Guilty? What Procedure Must The District Court Follow Before An Alford Plea Can Be Accepted?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.15-Alford_Plea_of_Guilty-Defendant_Denies_Guilt

PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT (10-14)

PROBLEM: WITH EACH NEW GENERATION OF PROSECUTORS MANY OF THE SAME PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT MISTAKES ARE REPEATED. ENCLOSED ARE TWO JUDICIAL RESOURCES TO ASSIST THE COURT IN ADDRESSING THIS ONGOING CONCERN?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.14-Prosecutorial_Misconduct

Battered Woman Syndrome (10-13)

QUESTION: During A Criminal Sexual Conduct (Rape) Jury Trial Involving A Battered Woman Relationship, The Prosecution Attempts To Introduce Evidence Of The “Battered Woman Syndrome” To Explain:

1. Why Some Victims Fail To Timely Report Crimes;

2. Why Some Victims Often Recant Testimony;

3. Why Some Victims Refuse To Leave Abusive Relationships,

What Is The “Battered Woman Syndrome” And What 4 Step Analysis Should The District Court Follow When Ruling On Admissibility?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.13-Battered_Woman_Syndrome

Residual Hearsay Exception Rule, Minn. R. Evid. 807 (10-12)

QUESTION: THE MORNING OF TRIAL YOU ARE ASKED TO RULE ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF A HEARSAY STATEMENT UNDER THE RESIDUAL EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE (Minn. R. Evid. 807). WHAT IS THE RESIDUAL HEARSAY EXCEPTION RULE AND WHAT 6 STEP ANALYSES MUST YOU FOLLOW TO PROPERLY RULE?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.12-Residual_Hearsay_Exception_Rule

Lothenbach Plea – A Potential judicial Landmine (10-11)

QUESTION: WHAT IS A LOTHENBACH PLEA/STIPULATION? Unlike some other states, Minnesota does not allow a defendant to make a conditional guilty plea. Before the Lothenbach decision, in order to preserve the right to appeal a pre-trial issue even when no other material facts were in dispute, a criminal defendant was first required to plead “not guilty” and then go through an unnecessary jury trial. Recognizing this was inefficient, the Supreme Court created a procedure to preserve a defendant’s right to appeal a pre-trial order and avoid an otherwise unnecessary jury trial.

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.11-Lothenbach_Plea-A_Potential_Judicial_Branch_Landmine

Rule 15 Type Questions to Finalize Divorce Proceedings (10-09)

QUESTION: WHAT ADDITIONAL INQUIRIES SHOULD THE COURT MAKE, WHEN DIVORCING PARTIES APPEAR IN COURT TO PUT THEIR FINAL AGREEMENT ON THE RECORD, TO PROTECT AGAINST EITHER PARTY SUBSEQUENTLY ASKING TO REOPEN THE CASE?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.09-Rule_15_Type_Questions_to_Finalize_Divorce_Proceedings

Determining Admissibility of Hearsay – Crawford v. Washington (10-08)

The Morning Of Trial, While Addressing Motions-In-Limine, You Are Asked To Rule On The Admissibility Of A Hearsay Statement For Use In The State’s Case In Chief. The Following Is A Seven Step Analysis The Court Should Apply In Determining Admissibility Of Any Hearsay Statement Under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004); see State v. Cox, A08-145 March 18, 2010.

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.08-Determining_Admissibility_of_Hearsay-Crawford

ADMISSIBILITY OF PRE-MIRANDA SILENCE (10-07) replaced by update (11-16)

This old update was replaced by new update (11-16).

Courtroom Closure – Full or Partial Exclusion (10-06)

QUESTION: You’re in the Middle of Trial and You Get a Request to Temporarily Exclude Someone from the Court Room. What Findings Must a Judge Make Before Ordering a Full or Partial Closure of a Public Trial Including Exclusion of any Member of the Public From Any Portion of the Public Trial?

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

Pendleton10.06-Courtroom_Closure-Full_or_Partial_Exclusions