State v. Robertson, A14–2130.

• Decision Date: 14 September 2016
• Docket Number: No. A14–2130.,A14–2130.
• Citation: 884 N.W.2d 864
• Parties: STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Marlon Rashaad ROBERTSON, Appellant.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

884 N.W.2d 864

STATE of Minnesota, Respondent,

v.Marlon Rashaad ROBERTSON, Appellant.

No. A14–2130.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Sept. 14, 2016.

Lori Swanson, Attorney General, Saint Paul, MN; and Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, Kelly O'Neill Moller, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, Minneapolis, MN, for respondent.

Bradford Colbert, Saint Paul, MN, for appellant.

OPINION

GILDEA

, Chief Justice.

Following a jury trial, appellant Marlon Rashaad Robertson was convicted of several offenses, including first-degree premeditated murder for the shooting death of Kevin Braziel, in violation of Minn.Stat. § 609.185(a)(1) (2014)

. On direct appeal, Robertson presents a number of claims. First, he claims the State presented insufficient evidence to sustain his convictions. Second, he contends the district court committed reversible error when it disallowed certain defense evidence at trial. Third, he asserts he was denied effective assistance of counsel when trial counsel decided not to interview a potential witness. Fourth, he claims he was entitled to a sentencing hearing under Miller v. Alabama, ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012). Finally, he asserts various other claims in a pro se supplemental brief. Because the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions, the district court did not commit reversible error by disallowing defense evidence offered at trial, Robertson was not denied effective assistance of trial counsel, he was not entitled to a sentencing hearing under Miller v. Alabama, and his pro se claims lack merit, we affirm.

The shooting at issue happened in June 2013 but the State's theory at trial was that the shooting was related to a robbery that occurred in April 2013. Kevin Braziel's friend, M.S., was the victim of that robbery. M.S. was at a party at the home of Robertson's girlfriend. During the party, three of Robertson's gang associates robbed M.S. at gunpoint. M.S. identified the robbers as M.B., K.W., and W.J. Robertson was also present during the robbery, though M.S. stated that Robertson “wasn't really an active participant.” A few days after the robbery, Robertson sent M.S. a Facebook message stating, “It's crazy how y[o]u turn[ed] on me.” M.S. responded by accusing Robertson of setting up the robbery and noting that Robertson did not come to his aid when the other individuals robbed and threatened to kill him. Robertson later sent a series of Facebook messages to an unidentified friend, claiming that M.S. admitted to being a snitch, “ha[d] police cards in his pockets,” and was responsible for the incarceration of one of Robertson's friends.

Two months later, on June 24, 2013, Braziel was shot and killed while talking to M.S. and J.H. in a North Minneapolis parking lot.¹ The State contended that Robertson's intended target was M.S., a “known prosecution witness” in connection with the April robbery. Rather than shooting M.S., however, Robertson shot Braziel.

S.L. was nearby when the shooting happened. She had opened the driver's side door of her vehicle and was changing her shoes when she noticed a young adult black male with a dark complexion, of average height (5'8 to 5'10) and average build, walking eastward. The individual was 5 to 7 feet away from S.L. as he passed behind her car. She saw “some[ ]” of the individual's face, but got a better look at his clothing and footwear. The individual was wearing “[a] white shirt with wording on it and tan jeans,” and a pair of Timberland boots that “were [ ] a distinctive autumn color” that S.L. had “never seen [ ] before.” S.L. explained that she specifically noticed the boots and her “eyes drew to them” because she had planned on asking the individual where he had purchased them. Shortly thereafter, she heard six to seven “boom[s]” and saw “shells flying.” Three of the bullets struck Braziel.² S.L. then saw the same individual walk back behind her car, with “his hand underneath his shirt like he was tucking something away.” The individual ran westward, and S.L. heard someone calling out for help.

When the police arrived at the scene, Braziel was bleeding heavily and unable to speak. J.H. told the officers that he did not see the shooter. M.S. asked to be taken to the police station before providing a statement. Once he arrived at the station, M.S. stated that he, rather than Braziel, was likely the intended victim of the shooting because of the arrests that were made after he reported the April robbery. Although M.S. initially reported that he had “nothing to tell” the officers about who was trying to shoot him, he later suggested that the YNT (“Young N Thuggin”) or Taliban gangs may have been behind the shooting, and he told the police the names of those who had robbed him (M.B. and W.J.).³

An initial search of the scene revealed eight 9–millimeter discharged shell casings scattered around the alley behind the parking lot. A forensic scientist with the Crime Lab Unit of the Minneapolis Police Department concluded that, based on the placement of the casings, the shooter was likely standing in the alley and firing through a gap in a fenced-in dumpster area, with a view of both the parking lot and the café located directly across from the parking lot. Multiple security and traffic cameras recorded the events surrounding the shooting. In addition to recording J.H., M.S., and Braziel as they took cover from the shots, the footage depicts a blue Oldsmobile with plastic tape covering a small back window, a car registered to M.B.'s girlfriend, driving down the alley shortly before the shooting. A man in a white shirt is seated in the front passenger seat. After the shooting, another camera recorded a man in a white t-shirt running down the alley and through L.S.'s yard.⁴

The day after the shooting, June 25, 2013, Robertson published a post to his Facebook page that read: “Lmfao ... [they] must forgot solo was on they ass!!!!free my hittas.” According to law enforcement trained in gang-related crimes, the statement roughly translates to: “Laughing my [ ] ass off ... !!!! Free my friends who have been charged with a crime.” At the time of the shooting, Robertson's gang associates W.J. and K.W. were still in jail for the April robbery of M.S. M.B., however, had posted bail and was no longer in custody. “Solo” was Robertson's street name.

Sometime between June 25 and June 27, 2013, Robertson sold the gun used in the shooting, a gun Devante Parker identified as Robertson's “heat.” Specifically, Robertson and M.B. met Parker and his associates in a North Minneapolis alley to sell the gun.⁵ When asked if the gun worked, Robertson replied that he knew it worked because he had “just shot it.” At the time of the sale, the gun's slide was “cocked back” like it had just been unloaded.

Four days after the shooting, S.L. reviewed a photographic lineup of potential suspects. She originally told police she was not sure she would be able to identify the shooter in a lineup, but later stated she thought she could recognize the individual she saw walking down the alleyway before and after the shooting. An officer who was unfamiliar with the case presented S.L. with a series of six photographs, one at a time, as a sequential lineup. As she reviewed the photos, S.L. said she was “stuck between” two photos because “[t]he males looked similar.” According to the officer administering the lineup, S.L. then “isolated two photos and set the other four aside and seemed to concentrate on [the] two photos.” The officer informed her that she was not allowed to do this but was instead required to review all six of the photos if she wished to examine a photo for the second time. S.L. eventually identified an individual other than Robertson as the shooter. Robertson's photograph, however, was the other photo S.L. initially set aside for further review. Following the lineup, the officer informed the investigator on the case that S.L. was torn between the two photographs she initially isolated, and video footage confirmed that she was uncertain in her final selection.

On July 31, 2013, the police executed a search warrant of Robertson's house and located a pair of autumn-colored Timberland boots. Police also located a Facebook profile picture in which Robertson was wearing the distinctive autumn-colored boots and a pair of tan pants.

The day after the search, the police interviewed Robertson. Robertson denied his involvement and stated that he did not know where he was on the day of the shooting. He did, however, admit that the autumn-colored boots found in his apartment were his and acknowledged that he exchanged a series of Facebook messages with M.S. following the robbery. He said that he had heard from multiple people that M.S. was a “snitch,” but that he “wasn't positive ... because he hadn't seen papers” indicating that M.S. was a confidential informant. Robertson further stated that he was a member of the Four Corner Hustler gang, as well as the Black Mob and YNT, and that he associated with members of the Taliban gang. When asked, Robertson denied knowing that M.B.'s girlfriend owned a blue Oldsmobile and that M.B. often drove the car.

On his first night in jail, Robertson placed a recorded phone call to a friend. He told his friend he was being charged with second-degree murder, but the evidence against him was “weak.” Robertson stated that all the police were going off of was “my shoes ... and a witness.” Robertson then read from his criminal complaint a summary of the evidence against him. When Robertson read the portion of the complaint describing the autumn-colored Timberland boots the witness noticed the shooter wearing, he commented, “[t]hey talking about my Tims.” Lastly, Robertson reported that the police showed him a picture of a car that he recognized as belonging to M.B.'s girlfriend, the blue Oldsmobile that was spotted at the scene of the shooting, but Robertson said he told police he did not know who owned the car.

After the grand jury...