Olson v. Green

Decision Date13 January 1982
Docket NumberNo. 80-2178,80-2178
Citation668 F.2d 421
Parties9 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1330 Dale Matthew OLSON, Appellant, v. Leslie GREEN, Chairman of Minnesota Board of Corrections, and Warren Spannaus, Attorney General of the State of Minnesota, Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Delaney & Thompson, Ltd., by John W. Lundquist, argued, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.

Thomas L. Johnson, Hennepin County Atty., Edward C. Anderson, Asst. Hennepin County Atty., argued, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellees.

Before HEANEY and BRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and HARRIS, Senior District Judge. *

BRIGHT, Circuit Judge.

Dale Matthew Olson seeks postconviction relief from his state jury trial conviction for the first degree murders of Lueberta Davis and her two children. Olson received three consecutive life sentences. The federal district court 1 denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.

Jean Beverly Link, Olson's separately tried and convicted accomplice, 2 refused to testify as a prosecution witness at Olson's trial in defiance of a court order. Thereafter, the prosecution introduced two statements that Link had given to police while in custody. The trial court admitted the statements as declarations against penal interest. Olson complained that admission of these custodial statements violated his sixth amendment right to confront the witness against him.

On appeal, the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected Olson's contention, concluding that he had waived his confrontation right. It held that the acts of coconspirator James Willis Black, which intimidated Link into silence, should be imputed to Olson, barring Olson from asserting his confrontation rights. State v. Olson, 291 N.W.2d 203, 207-08 (Minn.1980). In the subsequent habeas proceedings, the federal district court stated two grounds for denying Olson's petition to set aside the convictions: (1) the admission of Link's statements to the police constituted harmless error; 3 and (2) Olson waived his right of confrontation. 528 F.Supp. at 30.

We affirm on the ground that admission of Link's custodial statements to the police amounted to harmless error in the circumstances of this case.

I. The Evidence.

To put the evidence introduced at trial into the appropriate perspective, we first examine the State's case, without reference to Link's statements to the police. We next examine the evidence used in Olson's defense, including Link's trial testimony. Finally, we consider the probable impact of the challenged statements upon the jury in light of the other testimony and evidence received during the trial.

A. The State's Case Without Link's Statements or Testimony.

On January 19, 1978, at approximately 9:00 p. m., a fire occurred at 3043 Second Avenue South in Minneapolis. After firemen brought the flames under control, police found the bodies of the apartment's three occupants: Lueberta Davis, who had been gagged and bound to a bed; her daughter, Tesa, age six, who had also been tied to the bed; and her son, LaMarr, age two, who was found under the bed. Each of the victims had died from carbon monoxide poisoning. Investigators found one empty gasoline can in the apartment, and a second, partially filled can of gasoline propped between Tesa's legs. Tests indicated that gasoline had been poured throughout the apartment and on the victims.

Curtis Oppegaard, a bus driver for the Metropolitan Transit Commission, observed the outbreak of the fire while walking on the street adjacent to the Davis apartment. He first heard a "loud poof" and then saw a person run from between the houses to a yellow Volkswagen car which "took off" without its lights on. Oppegaard tentatively identified that person as a black male.

Police traced the yellow Volkswagen to Jean Beverly Link. The investigation also established a close relationship between Link and James Willis Black, an exconvict who was in the Hennepin County jail awaiting trial on robbery charges at the time of the Davis murders. The charges against Black included the robbery of a Red Owl Store in south Minneapolis on October 11, 1977. At the time of that incident, Black lived with Lueberta Davis and her two children. 4 After his arrest and incarceration, Black expressed a desire to other inmates to kill Davis to prevent her from testifying against him.

On January 9, 1978, Link told her friends, Ron and Jackie Johnson, that Black wanted her to "set fire to a house and burn a lady and her two children." Link asked Ron Johnson if he would help her kill the woman, but he refused. Approximately a week later, Link told Johnson that Black had found someone else "to do the job."

The State's evidence also indicates that Olson and Black were in close contact between January 5 and January 19, while they were both held in the Hennepin County jail. Olson obtained his release on January 19, the day of the Davis murders. That morning, Olson told a fellow inmate to tell Black, "I'm going to court; I'll be getting out after court, and I'll take care of it." That same day, Black asked the jail chaplain to "(t)ell Jean (Link) to do what we had planned, to carry out our plan."

Several of Olson's friends, including his girlfriend, Sandra McKenzie, waited at the courthouse for his release on January 19, 1978. A woman approached them as they waited and identified herself as Jean Link. After asking which one was Sandy, Link told Sandra McKenzie that she "had to talk some business with Dale."

When Olson appeared, Link took him aside. Olson's three friends did not overhear the subsequent conversation between Link and Olson, but Sandra McKenzie heard Link tell Olson that "she would contact him later on in the evening."

During the afternoon of January 19, which Olson spent at McKenzie's house in Golden Valley, Olson told McKenzie that he was "going to burn some evidence" that night. At approximately 7:30 p. m., Link arrived at McKenzie's residence. Link and Olson asked directions to Lake Street in Minneapolis, which is in the vicinity of the Davis apartment. Between 8:00 p. m. and 8:30 p. m., Link and Olson left in Link's yellow Volkswagen.

McKenzie also testified that Olson had agreed to destroy evidence for Black because Black had told Olson that Link's father would get Olson a job. She related that Olson told her that Black had contacted some people to kill a woman. McKenzie also testified that Olson and Link talked by phone the day after the Davis murders and Olson stated: "We didn't do anything wrong; there is no reason for you to be afraid."

Minneapolis police arrested Link on January 20, 1978. As a result of her cooperation, police recovered a partially burned down-filled ski jacket that several witnesses identified as the jacket worn by Olson on January 19, 1978.

The discovery of the jacket produced highly significant, tangible evidence linking Olson to the crime. Police discovered a trail of partially burned feathers leading from the Davis apartment to the place where the bus driver, Oppegaard, had seen the yellow Volkswagen parked at the onset of the fire. Police also discovered similar feathers in Link's automobile. An expert witness testified that all these feathers matched those found in Olson's ski jacket.

Police arrested Olson on January 20, 1978, and charged him with murder. A pair of jeans taken from Olson at the time of his arrest contained several burn holes, and bits of melted nylon and feathers adhered to the fabric. The beard on the right side of Olson's face and the hair on his leg were singed.

Although no direct evidence placed Olson within the Davis apartment, the circumstantial evidence presented a strong case against Olson. The evidence established without doubt that Olson occupied Link's Volkswagen during a time period when the Davis home had burned, that Olson had been in a fire at some time that evening, and that Olson acted on Black's behalf to destroy evidence. Only Oppegaard's description of the person running from the Davis house as a black man tended to negate the inference that Olson, who is white, had been in the Davis residence at the time of the fire.

B. Olson's Alibi.

Olson testified on his own behalf at his trial. In addition, Olson's counsel, without reservation, introduced the testimony Link had given at her own trial on the same murder charges. We consider first Olson's testimony.

Olson admitted entering Lueberta Davis' apartment at James Black's request on the night of the murders. He testified that his only purpose was to burn some clothing at Black's request. Black had told Olson that he would arrange transportation to and from the apartment. Olson admitted that Jean Link drove him to Davis' apartment on the evening of January 19, entered the Davis apartment with him, but left the apartment shortly thereafter. Olson testified that Davis gave him some clothes; then he left the apartment, and got into Link's car.

Olson testified that Link then drove him to a vacant lot about five blocks away, where he took a can of gasoline out of the trunk of Link's Volkswagen. 5 He stated that he walked into the lot with the can of gasoline and clothes, dug away some snow, poured gasoline on the clothes, and, with some difficulty, ignited the clothes while standing over them. Olson testified that in starting the fire he also burned the back of his ski jacket. 6 After starting the fire, Olson returned to Link's car and they left.

At trial, Olson admitted dropping his burned jacket behind a fence when Link stopped at a gasoline station after leaving the vacant lot. They then drove to the Janine Haney residence in Anoka County. Upon their arrival, Sandra McKenzie noticed that Olson had been burned. Olson told her that he had been too close to the fire when burning Black's clothes. He then said " 'It's all over now, and James can go free.' "

Olson's testimony also revealed a possible financial motive for his participation in the burning. In...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • State v. Lewis
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 7 Octubre 2005
    ...States v. Cherry, 217 F.3d 811, 820 (10th Cir.2000); United States v. Mastrangelo, 693 F.2d 269, 273-74 (2d Cir.1982); Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421, 429 (8th Cir.1982)). In the instant case, whether defendant participated in procuring the unavailability of the victim and witness, Ms. Carlso......
  • U.S. v. Carson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 21 Julio 2006
    ...Rule 804(b)(6)); Mastrangelo, 693 F.2d at 273-74, cited approvingly in Fed.R.Evid. 804(b)(6) advisory committee's note; Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421, 429 (8th Cir.1982) (recognizing that "someone acting on a [defendant's] behalf may waive or forfeit that [defendant's] right"). 25. Bourjaily......
  • State v. Rickman & Groseclose
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 17 Mayo 2002
    ...himself have been a party to the earlier proceeding or whether a similarly situated person will serve the purpose." Cf. Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421, 429 (8th Cir. 1982)("The right to confront witnesses is a constitutional right personal to the Still, it is worthy of repeating that, even if......
  • State v. Sheets
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • 15 Septiembre 2000
    ...114 F.3d 1284 (1st Cir.1997); U.S. v. Costa, 31 F.3d 1073 (11th Cir.1994); U.S. v. Matthews, 20 F.3d 538 (2d Cir.1994); Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421 (8th Cir. 1982); Barrow v. State, 749 A.2d 1230 (Del.1999); Smith v. State, 746 So.2d 1162 (Fla.App.1999); State v. Nieto, 186 Ariz. 449, 924 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State v. Parris Goes Too Far
    • United States
    • Seattle University School of Law Seattle University Law Review No. 8-01, September 1984
    • Invalid date
    ...State v. Parris, 98 Wash. 2d 140, 150-51, 654 P.2d 77, 82 (1982). At least two courts modified the Alvarez holding. See Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421, 428 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 1009 (1982) (must qualify under penal interest exception and in addition must comply with further conf......
  • The Admission of Blood Alcohol Reports After Bullcoming
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Lawyer No. 41-3, March 2012
    • Invalid date
    ...of an oath, admission of hearsay assertion under res gestae exception did not violate confrontation rights of defendant); Olson v. Green, 668 F.2d 421 (8th Cir. 1982) (holding that even if statements of another accused might have qualified for admission under Minnesota's penal interest exce......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT