State v. Christenson
| Decision Date | 16 July 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. C0-84-1979,C0-84-1979 |
| Citation | 371 N.W.2d 228 |
| Court | Minnesota Court of Appeals |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Kenneth D. CHRISTENSON, Appellant. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. The evidence was sufficient to sustain appellant's conviction for burglary in the third degree.
2. The trial court did not err in admitting bingo chips into evidence because the chips were not the product of an unlawful search and were voluntarily given to the police.
3. The trial court's remarks regarding the dismissal of charges against a co-defendant were not prejudicial and did not constitute reversible error.
4. Appellant did not have standing to object to a search of another person's home.
Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Janet A. Newberg, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Pete Kasal, McLeod County Atty., Glencoe, for respondent.
C. Paul Jones, Minn. State Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Considered and decided by POPOVICH, C.J., and PARKER and CRIPPEN, JJ., with oral argument waived.
Appellant Kenneth Christenson appeals his conviction of burglary in the third degree in violation of Minn.Stat. Sec. 609.582, subd. 3 (1984). He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission evidence and the propriety of certain comments by the trial court during trial. We affirm.
Christenson and a friend, both of Minneapolis, visited Mary Columbus in Glencoe, Minnesota. They stayed at the trailer home of Barbara Wildey, Columbus' mother, which was about four doors from Columbus' trailer home. On January 3, 1984, about one or two days after they arrived, Christenson and Columbus went out drinking. According to Columbus, they were both intoxicated. On the return trip to Glencoe Columbus' car broke down, and a state trooper stopped to assist. The trooper discovered that the car had expired license tabs so he decided to issue a citation and transport Christenson and Columbus to the Glencoe police station. At the police station, at Columbus' request, Christenson was given the citation, and Columbus paid the $11 ticket. Christenson placed a paper bag he had removed from Columbus' car on the counter. When they had completed the paperwork and were leaving, Christenson lifted the bag, ripping it and spilling out some red plastic bingo chips. When the police officer asked if Christenson wanted the chips, he replied that the officer could keep them. Christenson and Columbus were then given a ride home by the police around 11:30 p.m.
Sometime between 11:15 p.m. and 6:45 a.m. that night the Park 'n Shop convenience store was burglarized. The store was located about 200 feet from the trailer court. Broken glass was noticed, and about 50 to 60 cartons of cigarettes and cigarette packages were missing. Two red bingo chips were found at the scene. These chips matched the chips which Christenson had left on the counter the previous night. When Christenson was arrested, he told officers that bingo chips had fallen out of his bag at the police station the night of January 3, 1984, and that he usually carried bingo chips with him. Police searched Mary Columbus' trailer on January 5, 1984, pursuant to a search warrant and recovered cartons and packages of cigarettes, later identified as the ones taken from the Park 'n Shop. Columbus was arrested and charged with possession of stolen property; charges were dismissed when the State refused to disclose the identity of a confidential informant used in the search warrant application.
After Christenson's arrest, his shoes were seized, and broken glass from the Park 'n Shop was sent to the BCA for analysis. The BCA analyst testified that some glass particles were found in Christenson's shoes. These were compared with the glass found at the scene, and the analyst concluded that the glass from Christenson's shoes could have come from the same source as the glass found at the scene.
Barbara Wildey's 18-year-old daughter Kay testified that she overheard her mother and Columbus expressing anger at Christenson for bringing the cigarettes into the house.
Christenson was convicted of burglary in the third degree and was sentenced to 41 months imprisonment.
1. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain appellant's conviction?
2. Did the trial court err in admitting into evidence bingo chips and appellant's statements about the chips?
3. Did the trial court err in commenting on the dismissal of charges against Columbus?
4. Did appellant have standing to object to the search of Columbus' trailer home?
From our review of the record, the evidence was sufficient to sustain Christenson's conviction for burglary in the third degree.
Christenson challenges the admission into evidence of the bingo chips and his statements about the chips to police officers. Christenson argues that he was illegally arrested when taken to the police station for expired license tabs and that the chips were illegally seized.
We need not address whether Christenson was illegally arrested because it is clear that the chips were lawfully admissible. The chips were not the product of any improper exploitation following the arrest for expired license tabs. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 488, 83 S.Ct. 407, 417, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). At the time the chips came into possession of police, the crime had not yet been committed. The chips were not the product of a "search." The chips were voluntarily given to the police because when asked if he wanted the chips back, Christenson replied, "no, you can keep them." See State v. Hanson, 286 Minn. 317, 176 N.W.2d 607 (1970).
Christenson claims that statements he made to police about the chips were suppressed by the trial court but improperly admitted at trial. There was no such suppression order. The trial court, by omnibus hearing order and by oral order immediately prior to trial, ruled the chips admissible.
Christenson claims the trial court erred in commenting on the dismissal of charges against co-defendant Mary Columbus. On direct examination the State asked police officer Larry Aldape whether Mary Columbus had been arrested for the Park 'n Shop burglary. On cross-examination defense counsel inquired whether Columbus was taken into custody, whether she was charged, whether charges were dismissed, and whether anything was pending against her. At the conclusion of Aldape's testimony the trial court commented to the jury:
Before the state calls its next witness, there has been some information furnished the jury regarding Mary Columbus having been charged with the commission of this crime and that matter had been dismissed. You, the members of the jury, should understand that the defendant Mary Columbus was a defendant charged with the same crime,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Weatherford, No. A05-250 (MN 5/2/2006)
...cannot be admitted as evidence of guilt at trial and can be used only for impeachment purposes, if at all." State v. Christenson, 371 N.W.2d 228, 232 (Minn. App. 1985) (citing Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 394, 88 S. Ct. 967, 976 (1968)). In establishing this rule, the United Stat......
-
State v. Johnson
...cannot later be used to establish guilt in violation of her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination." See State v. Christenson, 371 N.W.2d 228, 232 (Minn. App. 1985) ("Testimony given by a defendant in support of a motion to suppress cannot be admitted as evidence of guilt at trial......
-
State v. Bennett, C1-85-1435
...are an attempt to impress upon the jurors the trial court's viewpoint as to the defendant's guilt or innocence." State v. Christenson, 371 N.W.2d 228, 231 (Minn.Ct.App.1985) (citing State v. Shetsky, 229 Minn. 566, 40 N.W.2d 337 While the trial court's response, "what difference does it mak......
-
State Of Minn. v. Mcilraith, A09-1568
...to suppress cannot be admitted as evidence of guilt at trial and can be used only for impeachment purposes, if at all." 371 N.W.2d 228, 232 (Minn. App. 1985). Christenson is inapplicable here. Although Mcllraith testified during the first pretrial suppression hearing that he took the indepe......