State v. Bowles
| Decision Date | 21 April 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. C0-93-2105,C0-93-2105 |
| Citation | 530 N.W.2d 521 |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Shannon Noah BOWLES, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. The use of an anonymous jury is not inherently prejudicial to a defendant's presumption of innocence. This court's review of the use of anonymous juries shall be for actual prejudice to the defendant. The use of an anonymous jury in this case did not result in actual prejudice to the defendant. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it impanelled an anonymous jury.
2. The evidence presented at trial is sufficient to sustain the defendant's convictions.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the defendant's motion for reconsideration of his motion for a new trial.
4. A criminal defendant has a constitutionally protected right to a fair trial. That right may be undermined by juror misconduct. Where the record is inadequate from which to determine whether juror misconduct occurred, limited remand to the trial court is appropriate.
John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Evan W. Jones, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, and Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Atty., J. Michael Richardson, Mark V. Griffin, Asst. County Attys., Minneapolis, for respondent.
Heard, considered, and decided by the court en banc.
Shannon Noah Bowles was convicted by an anonymous Hennepin County jury of premeditated first-degree murder under Minn.Stat. § 609.185(1) (1994), first-degree murder of a peace officer under Minn.Stat. § 609.185(4) (1994), and attempted first-degree murder under Minn.Stat. § 609.17 (1994) in connection with the assassination-style murder of Minneapolis Police Officer Jerry Haaf and the wounding of Gerald Lubarski during the early morning hours of September 25, 1992. The trial court sentenced Bowles to two concurrent terms of life imprisonment on the first-degree murder convictions, and a consecutive term of 180 months' imprisonment on the attempted first-degree murder conviction.
In this appeal Bowles contends: his right to a fair trial was violated when the trial court impanelled an anonymous jury; the evidence presented at trial is insufficient to sustain the convictions; and the trial court erroneously refused to reconsider his motion for a new trial. Bowles raises a number of additional issues in his pro se brief. We have reviewed each of those issues and are satisfied that any claimed error was, at most, harmless. 1 Our review of the record brought to our attention an issue, not raised by Bowles, involving possible juror misconduct. Because we lack a sufficient record from which to determine whether juror misconduct occurred, we retain jurisdiction and remand for further proceedings as discussed herein.
Between 1:30 and 2:00 a.m. on Friday, September 25, 1992, two black males 2 walked into the Pizza Shack restaurant at Lake Street and 17th Avenue in Minneapolis. There were 10 to 15 people in the restaurant at the time, including Officer Haaf, who was in uniform, on duty, and seated at the "officers' table" 3 having coffee with Gerald Lubarski and Margaret Hapsch. The two men approached Officer Haaf from behind. Without warning or provocation, they pulled out handguns and at close range fired two to four shots at Officer Haaf's back. 4 Two bullets entered Officer Haaf's back and he died a short time later. Lubarski suffered a bullet wound to his left arm. Hapsch was not injured.
The police never recovered the guns used in the shooting. However, the medical examiner who conducted the autopsy on Officer Haaf's body determined the gunshot wounds were caused by a large caliber handgun, as opposed to a small caliber handgun like a .22. Forensic tests revealed that bullets and bullet fragments recovered from the restaurant and Officer Haaf's body were consistent with .38 and .357 caliber ammunition, and appeared to have been fired from revolvers. 5 Further, the absence of shell casings at the scene led police to conclude the weapons used in the shooting were revolvers.
According to the state's theory of the case, Officer Haaf was killed by members of the Vice Lords street gang 6 in retaliation for the alleged beating of a blind, elderly black man by Metropolitan Transit Commission police. When they learned of the alleged beating, several Vice Lords members went to a meeting of police and community members that was taking place at Minneapolis North High School. After the meeting, a group, including Bowles, Mwati McKenzie, A.C. Ford, Montery Willis, and a 15-year-old named Richard, 7 met at the home of Sharif Willis 8 to plan some form of retaliation for the alleged beating. After rejecting a suggestion that they shoot a bus driver, they settled on a plan to "do the Pizza Shack."
With Ford driving Bowles and Montery Willis in a Ford Bronco and with Richard driving McKenzie in a rented tan, four-door Ford Granada, the group left Sharif Willis' house, traveled to within one block of the Pizza Shack, and dropped off Bowles and McKenzie. After the shooting, Bowles and McKenzie ran one block to the home of Loverine and Ed Harris. Ed Harris was a member of the Vice Lords. Upon arriving at the Harris home, Bowles and McKenzie changed their shirts, shoes, and hats, disposed of their guns, and washed their hands. Richard arrived at the Harris home shortly thereafter, and the three of them departed.
Police arrived at the Pizza Shack within minutes of the shooting and immediately began their investigation. Between 3:00 and 3:30 a.m. four officers went to the Harris home and, with the Harris' consent, searched the house, but found nothing incriminating. Two weeks after the Haaf murder, Ed Harris was found shot to death in a south Minneapolis alley. 9 Police theorized that Ed Harris was killed by other Vice Lords members because they were afraid he was giving police information about the Haaf murder.
Key testimony in support of the state's theory of the case came from four individuals. Richard testified about the meeting at the Willis house, the car ride to the Pizza Shack, and the events at the Harris home after the shooting. Loverine Harris testified about the events surrounding Bowles', McKenzie's, and Richard's arrival at her home and her subsequent identification of Bowles to the police. Eugene McDaniel, a Vice Lords member who shared an apartment with Bowles and Steve Morrison, testified that Bowles' weapon of choice was a .357 revolver in which he used .38 caliber ammunition and about a telephone conversation he had with Bowles the evening after the Haaf murder. 10 Percy Melton, an inmate at the Hennepin County Jail on an assault and battery charge unrelated to the Haaf murder, testified about various events that occurred and conversations he had with Bowles while they were incarcerated together.
Richard, Loverine Harris, McDaniel, and Melton each received some benefit from the state as a result of testifying at trial. In exchange for Richard's agreement to testify in the trials of those accused of the Haaf and Harris murders, the state moved Richard's family, at the family's request, and agreed not to refer Richard for prosecution as an adult for the Haaf murder. Because Loverine Harris was concerned about her family's safety, she and her children were relocated at the state's expense. In exchange for McDaniel's cooperation in the prosecution of those accused of the Haaf murder, the state dismissed a state charge against him involving a 1992 aggravated robbery and arranged for his sentence on a federal firearms charge to be reduced from a possible sentence of life imprisonment to, at most, 77 or 92 months' imprisonment. Melton's plea agreement for the assault and battery was rejected prior to Melton providing information about Bowles to the police. However, in exchange for Melton's agreement to testify in the prosecution of Bowles and others accused of the Haaf murder, the state entered into a plea agreement, subsequently accepted by a court, that reduced his possible 98 month prison sentence to 12 months in the workhouse and 10 years' probation. The jury, through either direct or cross-examination, was made aware of the benefits received by the state's witnesses.
Bowles testified in his own defense at trial. According to Bowles, he spent September 24 collecting drug-related debts. Throughout the day, he and Morrison stopped by Sharif Willis' house. During their third visit, at approximately 9:00 p.m., they found a number of Vice Lords members in a heated conversation about retaliating against the police over the beating of a blind, elderly black man. Bowles drove Morrison home and returned to the Willis house in Morrison's Ford Bronco. Bowles, Montery Willis, and Willis' girlfriend then left to collect money owed Willis. After collecting that money, they drove the Bronco to Curley's, a restaurant located down the block from the Pizza Shack. They arrived at Curley's between 12:15 and 12:30 a.m. Approximately 10 minutes after they arrived, Willis left in the Bronco to drive his girlfriend home and never returned. Ed Harris entered Curley's at about 1:15 a.m. Fifteen to 20 minutes after Harris left, Bowles heard two "pops," went to the restaurant's front door to investigate, and saw some men running from the Pizza Shack while a police car was "screaming" toward it. Bowles then saw Ed Harris and Richard walking toward the Harris home. Bowles eventually walked home to his apartment near 43rd and Minnehaha.
Bowles testified that the next morning Montery Willis returned Morrison's Bronco to Bowles and told Bowles about the Haaf murder, whereupon Bowles decided to temporarily shut down his drug-dealing business. He and Montery Willis went to Sharif Willis' house, where Bowles borrowed a car. The two then went to collect more drug debts. Bowles returned home during the afternoon, packed some clothes, picked up...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Clark, No. A06-1476.
..."indicating the defendant's participation in the crime is sufficient to corroborate the accomplice's testimony." State v. Bowles, 530 N.W.2d 521, 532 (Minn.1995) (citing State v. Jones, 347 N.W.2d 796, 800 (Minn.1984)). A defendant's "entire conduct" may be looked to for corroborating circu......
-
People v. Robles
...that approach here. The use of an anonymous jury is not inherently prejudicial. See Williams, 616 N.W.2d at 713–14;State v. Bowles, 530 N.W.2d 521, 529–30 (Minn.1995). But using an anonymous jury, or even referring to jurors by number, may, depending on the circumstances, create an impressi......
-
People v. Pena-Rodriguez
...under these exceptions, in rules identical to CRE 606. See Tobias v. Smith, 468 F.Supp. 1287, 1290 (W.D.N.Y.1979) ; State v. Bowles, 530 N.W.2d 521, 536 (Minn.1995).4 Benally, in turn, relied on Williams v. Price, 343 F.3d 223, 235–37 (3d Cir.2003). Benally, 546 F.3d at 1236. There, the Thi......
-
Gatlin ex rel. Gatlin v. Green, 02-CV-154JMR/SRN.
...murder convictions in Harris case); State of Minnesota v. McKenzie, 532 N.W.2d 210 (Minn.1995) (Haaf case); State of Minnesota v. Bowles, 530 N.W.2d 521 (Minn.1995) (Haaf 14. Mrs. Loverene Harris testified in at least seven trials following the Haaf murder. 15. Because plaintiff has not int......
-
The Modern Penny Dreadful: Public Prosecution and the Need for Litigation Privacy in a Digital Age
...in the interests of justice for the purpose of preventing intimidation and other potential interference with the jury); State v. Bowles, 530 N.W.2d 521, 530-31 (Minn. 1995) (holding that an anonymous jury may be impaneled when "there is strong reason to believe that the jury needs protectio......