Supreme Court Digest: May 1, 2024

Criminal

 

Mental Illness

Causation

Defendant appealed his convictions of first-degree arson, second-degree burglary, and theft of a motor vehicle, arguing that he was wrongly denied his right to assert a defense of mental illness. Defendant stole a vehicle from a garage, then started a fire that damaged the garage and an adjacent home. He was arrested near the fire. He sought to assert a mental-illness defense at trial and submitted multiple psychological reports from an expert attesting to his mental illness at the time of his offenses. In response to a motion brought by the State, the District Court rejected the mental-illness defense, concluding that defendant had offered insufficient evidence establishing that he was, at the time of the offenses, acting under a defect in reasoning caused by mental illness. Defendant was therefore precluded from asserting a mental-illness defense at trial. He was found guilty at trial, and the court of appeals affirmed the convictions.

The Supreme Court held that a District Court abuses its discretion in denying a defendant’s assertion of a mental-illness defense when the defendant has proffered prima facie evidence of a mental illness that meets the requirements to be excused from criminal liability under Minn. Stat. 611.026. Reversed and remanded.

A22-1206 State v. Hinckley (Court of Appeals)

 

 

 

Orders

 

Rules of General Practice

Amendments

The Supreme Court adopted, in modified form, amendments proposed to the Minnesota Rules of General Practice for the District Courts and Minnesota Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure to establish a presumptive personal leave continuance for attorneys under certain circumstances. These were adopted as a 2-year pilot project, and go into effect on September 1, 2024.

ADM09-8009, ADM04-8001, ADM09-8006 Order Promulgating Amendments to Minn. R. Gen. Prac. & Minn. R. Civ. App. P.

Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.