St. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A lawyer for Derek Chauvin asked an appeals court Wednesday to throw out the former Minneapolis police officer’s convictions in the killing of George Floyd, arguing that legal and procedural flaws deprived him of a fair trial.
Floyd died on May 25, 2020, after Chauvin, who is white, pinned the black man to the ground with a knee to his neck for 9 1/2 minutes. A video by a bystander captured Floyd’s muffled cries: “I can’t breathe.” Floyd’s death sparked protests around the world and forced a national reckoning with police brutality and racism.
Chauvin’s attorney, William Mohrman, told a three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals that the judge would have to move the case from Minneapolis because of extensive pretrial publicity and unprecedented security measures due to fears of protests.
“The central question in this appeal is whether a criminal defendant can obtain a constitutionally mandated fair trial in a courtroom surrounded by concrete blocks, barbed wire, two armored vehicles and a squad of National Guard troops, all of which or exists for one. purpose: whether the jury acquits the defendant,” Mohrman said.
But Neal Katyal, a special state prosecutor, said Chauvin received “one of the most transparent and thorough trials in our nation’s history. … Chauvin’s numerous arguments before this court do not come close to warranting reversal.”
Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill sentenced Chauvin to 22 1/2 years after jurors found him guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. Chauvin later pleaded guilty to a separate federal civil rights charge and was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison, meaning he is now serving his sentence in Arizona concurrently with his state sentence.
“Judge Cahill handled this trial with great care, and even if Chauvin can identify a small mistake, any mistake is harmless,” Katyal said. “Evidence of Chauvin’s guilt was filmed for the world to see.”
Appeals Judge Peter Reyes said Wednesday that the court will rule within 90 days. Chauvin did not attend the oral arguments, but Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who convened the prosecution team, was seated ringside.
Even if Chauvin wins the appeal, his federal sentence would keep him in prison longer than his state sentence likely would because he would qualify for parole earlier in the state system.
Mike Brandt, a Minneapolis defense attorney who has prosecuted lawsuits following Floyd’s killing, said an appeal victory “would be functionally meaningless” and that Chauvin’s time in prison is ” pretty well set in stone.” , given his federal conviction.
Mohrman frequently pursues conservative causes, including challenges to President Joe Biden’s election victory and COVID-19 vaccination mandates.
Mohrman argued in his brief that the pretrial publicity was greater than any other trial in Minnesota history and that the judge should have moved the trial and sequestered the jury. Mohrman wrote that the publicity and uproar, the city’s $27 million settlement with Floyd’s family announced during jury selection, the uproar over the killing of a police officer in a Minneapolis suburb during jury selection and the sealing of the courtroom there were only a few factors. undermining Chauvin’s chance for a fair trial.
Much of Wednesday’s questioning focused on a juror who attended a civil rights event commemorating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s March on Washington, months after Floyd’s death. Only after the trial did the juror reveal that he had been there.
During jury selection, he was asked if he attended rallies or marches “in Minneapolis” against police brutality after Floyd’s death. But Chauvin’s original attorney, Eric Nelson, did not ask if he had attended demonstrations elsewhere.
Mohrman argued that Cahill should have held a post-disclosure hearing to determine whether the juror’s failure to disclose constituted misconduct. He said the appeals court should send the case back to Cahill for a hearing on the issue — a request Cahill rejected.
Reyes said judges have “pretty broad discretion” in conducting trials and that Nelson questioned the juror and could have struck him, but didn’t. Reyes said case law puts the onus on the defense to ask the right questions.
Katyal told jurors the juror answered questions accurately and repeatedly insisted he could have returned an impartial verdict. He said the defense did not use three of its peremptory challenges, which he called a sign of satisfaction with the jury.
In their brief, prosecutors said preliminary publicity blanketed the state, making a change of venue unnecessary. They also argued that Cahill took sufficient steps to protect jurors from outside influence so that they would not be sequestered before deliberations.
Other disputes on appeal include whether it was legally permissible to convict Chauvin of third-degree murder, and whether Cahill was justified in exceeding the 12 1/2 years recommended by state guidelines.
I’m a passionate and motivated journalist with a focus on world news. My experience spans across various media outlets, including Buna Times where I serve as an author. Over the years, I have become well-versed in researching and reporting on global topics, ranging from international politics to current events.