2010-M-164             State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Michael Carrasco Sontoya, Appellant.

MAJORITY:  Appellant Michael Carrasco Sontoya was found guilty by a Ramsey County jury of first-degree murder while committing first-degree criminal sexual conduct, and second-degree unintentional murder while committing first-degree assault, arising out of the death of G.R. on September 30, 2008.  The district court entered judgment of conviction for first-degree murder while committing first-degree criminal sexual conduct, and sentenced Sontoya to life in prison without the possibility of release.  On direct appeal, Sontoya argues that the medical examiner’s expert testimony that G.R.’s injuries were due to sexual assault constituted reversible error that deprived him of a fair trial.  Sontoya also asserts various pro se arguments.  Because we conclude that Sontoya’s arguments lack merit, we affirm.

At 6:48 a.m. on September 30, 2008, emergency personnel were dispatched to Sontoya’s upper level duplex located in St. Paul in response to Sontoya’s911 call.  Paramedics found G.R. fully dressed on the bedroom floor.  She was not breathing; she had no detectable pulse; her body was cold and stiff; and her veins were flat.  Sontoya told paramedics that G.R. was alive right before they arrived.  Paramedics noticed blood on the floor and wall, as well as clotted blood in G.R.’s stair way.  The blood on the wall appeared to have been partially wiped away.  Splatters of blood led from the bedroom through the hallway to the bathroom.  Sontoya explained that there was blood on the walls and carpet because G.R. was menstruating.  The paramedics found very little blood on G.R.’s clothing, but found dried blood in her umbilicus and fingernail beds.  

 Sontoya told emergency personnel that G.R. and he had been at a bar the previous evening, and then went to his duplex around 2:00 a.m., had sex, and went to sleep.  When Sontoya awoke, G.R. was unresponsive; Sontoya called his brother, a police officer, who told him how to perform CPR, and told him to call 911.

First, the medical examiner's unobjected-to testimony that the victim was sexually assaulted did not result in plain error that affected appellant’s substantial rights because there was no reasonable likelihood that the testimony had a significant effect on the jury’s verdict.

Second, appellant’s pro se arguments lack merit.

CONCUR:  Justices Paul Anderson and Page opined:  “I concur in the result reached by the majority and would affirm the conviction of appellant, Michael Carrasco Sontoya; but I write separately to emphasize my concern with respect to the content of the medical examiner’s testimony.  The court assumes that there was error, and it was plain, and then concludes that the assumed plain error did not affect Sontoya’s substantial rights.  I would not skip an analysis under the first two prongs and would conclude that there was error and it was plain.  Moreover, I want to emphasize my position that how the court reached its conclusion on the third prong should not detract from the serious nature of the underlying error.  The only reason I would affirm is because this is one of those cases where the evidence that Sontoya murdered G.R. while committing or attempting to commit criminal sexual conduct is so overwhelming, we should affirm despite the serious nature of the error.

               Dietzen  (Gildea, Page, Paul Anderson, Meyer, and Barry Anderson)

               Concur:  Paul Anderson and Page

               Took no part:  Stras

               [MURDER]