State v. Whitson

Decision Date02 March 2016
Docket NumberNos. A04–0875,C5–02–2108.,s. A04–0875
Citation876 N.W.2d 297
Parties STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Vidale Lee WHITSON, Appellant, Vidale Lee Whitson, Appellant, v. State of Minnesota, Respondent.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

Vidale Lee Whitson, pro se, Bayport, MN, for appellant.

Lori Swanson, Attorney General, Saint Paul, MN; and Mark S. Rubin, St. Louis County Attorney, Gary W. Bjorkland, Assistant St. Louis County Attorney, Duluth, MN, for respondent.

OPINION

LILLEHAUG

, Justice.

Appellant Vidale Lee Whitson was convicted of first-degree felony murder for the killing of Milton Williams and attempted first-degree premeditated murder for the shooting of T.C. In this consolidated direct appeal and appeal from the denial of postconviction relief, Whitson alleges five grounds for relief. We affirm.

I.The Crime and Investigation

On the evening of April 24, 2001, the Duluth 911 Center received an emergency call from a woman, T.C., pleading for help. T.C. reported that she had been shot, that another person in the apartment was dead, and that the man who had shot them was no longer in the apartment. During the call, T.C.'s upstairs neighbor A.B., who had heard the gunshots, entered the apartment to investigate. A.B. took the phone from T.C. and told the operator that he had witnessed three black men leave through the back door of the apartment and drive off in a car with Minnesota plate number 650 PYT.

When police arrived at the apartment, they found a man lying face down in a pool of blood in the kitchen and T.C. sitting on the floor with blood on her face and hands. The man, Milton Williams, had been shot three times in the legs and once in the head. T.C. had been shot once in the left cheek, causing major injuries to her face, jaw, neck, and vocal cords. When asked three times by responding officers who had shot her, she answered "Tyrone White," then "Tyrone," and finally "Tyrone White and his friend." T.C. survived, but Williams was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Information identifying the vehicle carrying the suspects was broadcast to law enforcement, and almost immediately a Duluth police officer observed a car matching the description travelling southbound on Interstate 35. The officer began to pursue the car, confirmed that its license plate matched the one given by A.B., and followed until the car came to a stop in a gas station parking lot. Inside the car were three men and a woman. The driver was Tyrone White, the front-seat passenger was Ben King, the passenger seated behind the driver was Charlessetta Jackson, and seated on the rear passenger's side was appellant Vidale Whitson. When the occupants left the car, White was wearing a floral-patterned shirt, King was wearing a gray and white striped shirt, and Whitson was wearing an orange plaid shirt. Upon searching the vehicle, the police found a plastic bag containing cocaine and another bag containing $2,915.

On August 20, 2001, Whitson was indicted on three counts: the first-degree premeditated murder of Milton Williams, Minn.Stat. § 609.185(1) (2000)

, the first-degree murder of Milton Williams during an aggravated robbery, Minn.Stat. § 609.185(3), and the attempted first-degree premeditated murder of T.C., Minn.Stat. §§ 609.185(1), .17 (2000). All three offenses were charged on an accomplice-liability theory. Whitson's attorney made motions in limine seeking, among other things, to exclude evidence that Ben King and his girlfriend J.M. had been threatened in an attempt to keep King from testifying to the events of April 24. The court granted Whitson's motion to exclude any evidence of threats against witnesses.

At trial, the State argued that Whitson was the sole gunman and fired the shots that killed Williams and injured T.C. Whitson's defense was that Ben King shot Williams and T.C. and that Whitson did nothing to aid in the commission of the crimes. Because forensic evidence could not establish the identity of the gunman,1 the State's case that Whitson was the shooter centered on the testimony of two eyewitnesses: T.C. and Ben King. Whitson did not testify at the trial.

T.C.'s Testimony

T.C. testified that, on the day of the crime, she received a telephone call from Tyrone White, who was calling from somewhere in the Twin Cities. White asked her if he could spend the night at her apartment in Duluth. T.C. responded that he could not stay with her because Williams was there, but that he could stop by. Between 6:00 and 6:30 that evening, White arrived at the apartment, accompanied by a man T.C. knew as "Big Time" (Ben King's nickname), and a man wearing a plaid shirt whom she did not recognize. While King and the man in the plaid shirt sat in the living room, White entered the kitchen and began talking with T.C., Williams, and two other women.

Shortly thereafter, the two other women left the apartment. White and Williams began arguing over a $50 debt that White supposedly owed Williams. During the argument, White looked into the living room and nodded. King and the man in the plaid shirt then entered the kitchen. The man in plaid shot Williams, first in the legs and then in the head. T.C. began to plead for her life. She watched as one of the men reached into Williams' pockets and pulled out some objects. T.C. then felt "a burning sensation" on her face and fell to the ground. She had been shot. Though she did not see who shot her, T.C. testified that only the man in the plaid shirt had a gun. T.C. further testified that she initially identified "Tyrone White" as the shooter because, of the three, she knew only his name and wanted to ensure that police could catch her attackers.

Ben King's Testimony

When King was arrested on April 24, he initially told police that he did not know anything about what happened in T.C.'s apartment. However, 2 days later he contacted police and indicated that he wanted to talk about the crime. Ultimately he reached an agreement with the State to plead guilty to aiding an offender after the fact. As part of the plea, King agreed to testify at Whitson's trial, and he and the State agreed to recommend that King would be sentenced to 150 months in prison.

At Whitson's trial, King testified that, on the day of the crime, White, Whitson, and another man named Doug had been talking and drinking beer in Minneapolis when White suggested traveling to Duluth to rob a man whom he thought had a lot of money. White suggested that he could start an argument with the man over a $50 debt as a pretext for robbing him. White then noted that it would not be easy to rob the man, and told Whitson he may have to use "the thing" on the man. King took this to be a reference to a gun. King testified that Whitson responded: "[Y]ou shouldn't be able to hear a .22 inside of a house."

King then borrowed a gun from Doug and stowed it in the back pocket of the driver's seat in Charlessetta Jackson's car. White used King's cell phone to call T.C. to make sure that the man they planned to rob would be at her apartment. White, King, Whitson, and Jackson then drove to Duluth in Jackson's car. When the four arrived at T.C.'s apartment, White instructed Jackson to park the car facing outward and to leave the engine running.

White, King, and Whitson then entered the apartment and sat in the living room. White went into the kitchen and joined T.C. and Williams. White began to argue with Williams, at which point King started to leave the apartment because he wanted a cigarette and did not want to be there when Whitson robbed Williams. But, before King could leave, he heard gunshots and turned to see Whitson standing in the doorway between the living room and the kitchen, holding the gun. As Williams staggered, Whitson shot Williams in the top of the head. Whitson then told King to take Williams' pants off. But the pants would not come off, so King searched Williams' pockets and removed two plastic bags, one containing money and the other containing what King believed to be drugs. T.C. was on her knees, crying and pleading for her life. Whitson shot her.

King, White, and Whitson ran out of the apartment and fled the scene in the waiting car. Whitson told King to give him the money he had taken from Williams. King passed the money and drugs to Whitson, at which point they noticed a police car turn around on the highway and begin to pursue them. White, who was driving, tried to elude the police. At King's instruction, Whitson threw the gun out the window. Shortly thereafter, White stopped the car in a gas station parking lot where they were arrested.

On cross-examination, Whitson's defense attorney aggressively challenged King's credibility. He emphasized inconsistencies among King's trial testimony, grand jury testimony, and statements to police. On redirect, the prosecutor attempted to rehabilitate King's credibility. The following exchange occurred.

Q: Yesterday during cross-examination you admitted ... the details about White saying that—to Whitson, this is in Minneapolis, "You may have to use the thing," meaning the gun, and Whitson replying, "you probably won't be able to hear a .22 inside a house," but you left that out of any statements given to authorities or anybody else until August 2 of this year, is that right?
A: Yes.
Q: Why did you leave that out until all the way to August of this year?
A: Because I was scared, and, plus, I've been getting threats on my family—

Whitson's attorney immediately objected, and the court sustained the objection.

Without the jury present, Whitson's attorney moved for a mistrial based on the introduction of "highly prejudicial and inflammatory" evidence of threats specifically excluded by the pretrial ruling. The prosecutor responded that he was attempting to elicit testimony that King was reluctant to provide information because he was scared for his personal protection, but that "the part about the threats I did not expect and did not attempt to solicit."

The court observed that "if you get into fear with this witness, the fact that there may have been...

To continue reading

Request your trial
42 cases
  • State v. Chauvin
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • 17 April 2023
    ...a new trial, Chauvin must also show that the incomplete transcript prevented him from obtaining meaningful review. State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 307 (Minn. 2016). Here, Chauvin neither alleges that anything occurred in conferences that would independently constitute error nor asserts th......
  • State v. Jones
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • 3 April 2017
    ...to the prosecutor"). "Where such misconduct is alleged, the standard of review depends on whether the defendant objected at trial." Whitson, 876 N.W.2d at 304. In this case, Jones did not object either to V.W.'s testimony about the Snickers-bar incident or to V.W.'s testimony about Jones's ......
  • Woi v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • 27 August 2018
    ...him guilty of assault. Second, "the prejudicial effect of misconduct can be cured by proper instructions to the jury." State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see State v. Trimble, 371 N.W.2d 921, 926-27 (Minn. App. 1985) (concluding that "the prosecutor's misstatement of the st......
  • State v. Jenkins
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • 19 August 2019
    ...if it is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because "the jury's verdict was surely unattributable to the misconduct." State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016) (quotation omitted). In this case, the state concedes that evidence concerning a prior booking photograph of Jenkins is in......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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