2012-M-204        State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Craig Matthew Hohenwald, Appellant.

After the State filed a criminal complaint against appellant Craig Matthew Hohenwald charging him with four counts of second-degree murder, a grand jury indicted Hohenwald on two counts of first-degree premeditated murder, two counts of first-degree felony murder, and two counts of second-degree murder, while the criminal proceedings against him were suspended to assess his  ompetency.  Following a bench trial, the district court convicted Hohenwald on both counts of first-degree premeditated murder. 

On appeal, Hohenwald challenges his convictions on four grounds.  First, he asserts that the district court erred when it denied his motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the State conducted the grand jury proceedings in violation of Rule 20.01.  Second, he claims that the record contains insufficient evidence to convict him of first-degree premeditated murder because the State failed to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted in the heat of passion.  Third, he argues the prosecutor committed misconduct during witness questioning.  Fourth, he contends the district court committed reversible error when it admitted a witness’s out-of-court statement. 

We affirm Hohenwald’s convictions.

HELD:  First, an order suspending the criminal proceedings pursuant to Minn. R. Crim. P. 20.01 did not invalidate the grand jury’s subsequent indictment for first-degree premeditated murder.

Second, the record contains sufficient evidence to support the district court’s verdict that the appellant was guilty of the offense of first-degree premeditated murder rather than heat-of-passion manslaughter.  

Third, the unobjected-to prosecutorial errors did not affect the appellant’s substantial rights.

Fourth, the district court’s admission of a witness’s out-of-court statement was harmless.

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

 [MURDER]