Juvenile Certification is Not Offense Specific.

State v. Grigsby, Minn.Ct.App., 8/15/2011.  Mr. Grigsby Jr., shot and killed J.S. in part, apparently, because J.S. declined to shake hands with Mr. Grigsby Jr.  A juvenile petition charged Mr. Grigsby Jr. with second degree intentional murder, on which the juvenile court certified him to stand trial in district court.  Mr. Grigsby Jr. sought to remove the trial judge (who had also presided over the certification proceedings). In the district court the state added a charge of second degree felony murder.  The trial court ruled that unless and until Mr. Grigsby Jr. testified that he feared for his life because J.S. and his cohorts were members of a gang, the defense could not offer any gang affiliation evidence, including cross examination of state witnesses.  The jury convicted Mr. Grigsby Jr. of second degree felony murder.  He raised several issues on appeal.

Denial of the notice to remove:  The trial judge had denied the removal request on the rationale that because he had presided at the certification evidentiary hearing the removal notice was ineffective.  The court of appeals adopts this rationale and upholds the trial court’s refusal to grant the removal demand.

Jurisdiction over Offenses Added After Certification:  The court of appeals concluded that certification is not offense specific.  The certification rule, 18.07, says that adult court prosecution is “on the alleged offense(s) specified in the certification order.”  Alas, the rule does not “preclude” the district court from exercising jurisdiction over alleged offenses that were not so specified.

Additional Certification Hearing on Added Charges:  Mr. Grigsby Jr. argued that he was entitled to a separate certification hearing as a matter of due process on the added charges.  The court of appeals rejects this argument.  The original certification order included findings of Mr. Grigsby’s conduct, which supported the second degree felony murder charge added thereafter.  He thus got the process that he was due.

Exclusion of Gang Affiliation Evidence:  The state agreed that evidence of gang membership may be admissible to show witness bias.  That wasn’t the issue, however, back at the trial court.  Rather, it was the trial court’s determination that Mr. Grigsby’s testimony was the only way in which the relevance of gang related evidence to a claim of self defense could be established.  After all, the state of mind necessary to support a self defense claim may be established circumstantially.  See State v. Johnson, 719 N.W.2d 619, 631 (Minn. 2006).  The court of appeals didn’t like this trial court ruling, but after Mr. Grigsby testified he did not seek to recall any witness to ask about gang affiliation so the court gets to avoid the matter all together.

Assault Can be the Predicate Offense in a Felony Murder Charge:  Yes, it can, according to the supreme court so take it up with them.  State v. Jackson, 346 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 1984).