Don't tell a room full of people that you slit the victim's throat and stabbed her in the heart three days before police released her cause of death, or explain the blood on your clothes by saying you cut off the head of a turtle!

2015-M-279       Jack Willis Nissalke, petitioner, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.

THE CRIME:  This was a long-unsolved act of witness intimidation and cruel revenge.

On June 6, 1985, Ada Senenfelder was found murdered in her home in Winona.  Senenfelder was cut and stabbed 33 times and bled to death from a stab wound to the heart.  Senenfelder’s murder went unsolved for decades.  But in 2006, Spotlight on Crime, a non-profit organization that works in cooperation with law enforcement agencies on cold cases, offered a $50,000 reward and held a press
conference highlighting Senenfelder’s murder.  Witnesses eventually came forward with information linking Nissalke to the murder.  

The State presented evidence at trial to support its theory that Nissalke and Linda Erxickson murdered Senenfelder because Senenfelder told the police that Nissalke’s friend, James Bolstad, had sexually assaulted someone.  Erickson was James Bolstad’s girlfriend.  Nissalke “hung out” with Erickson, James Bolstad, and other Bolstad family members.  As a result of Senenfelder’s allegations, James Bolstad was taken into custody for violating his probation in the spring of 1985 and shortly before the murder.

The State connected Nissalke with the murder because he was part of Erickson’s efforts to get Senenfelder to withdraw her allegations against James Bolstad.  Erickson tried to make Senenfelder sign a document saying that Senenfelder was lying.  Erickson told others that Senenfelder “will have to sign that or she’s going to have to pay for it.  That bitch will die.”  During a jail phone call with James Bolstad, Erickson said that she was “pissed off” and that Senenfelder should sign a statement to say that James Bolstad did not commit the assault and to “make sure that she had it notarized.”  Erickson said that, “she would kill her, she could kill [Senenfelder].”

Nissalke assisted Erickson according to the State.  Specifically, Erickson and Nissalke went to Senenfelder’s apartment to get her to drop the charges against James Bolstad so that he could be released from jail.  They broke the lock on Senenfelder’s front door to get inside because Senenfelder refused to open the door.  Erickson and Nissalke told Senenfelder to drop the charges in an “angry” manner, and Senenfelder appeared “terrified.” Nissalke and Erickson spoke to Senenfelder frequently after they broke into her apartment in a continuing effort to get her to drop her allegations against
James Bolstad.  

Nissalke admitted to the police that about a week before the murder, Nissalke, Edward Bolstad, James Bolstad’s brother, and others stole Senenfelder’s bike and radio to get her to drop the allegations she made against James.  Nissalke also threatened Senenfelder before the murder and yelled at Senenfelder to make sure she changed her statement.  

 Senenfelder eventually did recant her statement to James Bolstad’s probation officer.  Nissalke made a tape recording of Senenfelder’s recantation.  Erickson was “happy” after hearing the tape, so she decided to throw a party on June 5, 1985.  Nissalke, Erickson, Edward Bolstad, and other individuals, including several of the State’s witnesses, attended the party.  Senenfelder did not.   At some point during the party, Erickson took a phone call in the bedroom.  When Erickson came out, she told everyone that the tape-recorded recantation “didn’t work” and that James “wasn’t getting out of jail.” 

Erickson was “very upset” and “mad” when she delivered the news.  Erickson told the partygoers that something had to be done about Senenfelder.  Erickson said “she would pay somebody to kill the f---ing bitch.”  Nissalke asked Erickson “[w]hat she would pay to have her done in and if she would be willing to and somebody would get rid of her.”  Nissalke also said in a “harsh tone” that “[t]he bitch
could be killed easy” and “the bitch has to go[,] . . . [s]he has to die.”  Nissalke and Erickson then left the party, saying, “kill the bitch.”  

 A photo the State entered into evidence taken of Nissalke on the night of the party depicted Nissalke carrying a knife that Nissalke wore “all the time.”  R.B. testified that on the night of Senenfelder’s murder, Nissalke went to R.B.’s apartment, which was in the same building as Senenfelder’s apartment, and asked R.B. for a flashlight.  Nissalke told R.B. that he needed the flashlight “because he had lost a knife” and needed to look underneath the car for it.  R.B. testified that when she saw Nissalke that night, he “had a white rag wrapped around his hand” that had a “[r]eddish and pinkish” stain on it.  When R.B. asked Nissalke what happened to his hand, Nissalke said that he had cut it while cutting the head off of a turtle.

J.B. told Nissalke during a meeting with the party attendees that she would not say no one left the party because “it would be a lie.”  Nissalke told J.B. that if she told the truth, then Nissalke “would kill [her] like he did Ada.”  Nissalke said that he “sliced [Ada’s] throat and stabbed her in the heart” and that J.B. “would get the same thing if [she] didn’t shut up.”  Nissalke threatened, “I will get you like I did Ada, once through the heart.”  R.B. was also at the meeting, and she testified that Nissalke said: “ ‘Yeah, she died slow.’  ‘She didn’t die quickly.’  ‘I stabbed her in the heart.’  ‘I cut her throat,’ ” and then Nissalke made a “motion like [he was] cutting across the throat.” This was three days before police revealed the nature of Senenfelder's death and wounds.

In July 2009 appellant Jack Willis Nissalke was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.185(a)(1) (2014), for the 1985 murder of Ada Senenfelder.  The trial court sentenced Nissalke to life imprisonment without the possibility of release, and we affirmed Nissalke’s conviction in 2011. 

THIS APPEAL:  On July 1, 2013, Nissalke filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief raising a sentencing claim, a restitution claim, and several claims of newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel.  The post-conviction court granted relief on Nissalke’s sentencing claim, but denied relief on Nissalke’s other claims without holding an evidentiary hearing.  In this appeal, Nissalke claims that the post-conviction court erred when it denied his claims without an evidentiary hearing.  Because the petition and the files and records of the proceeding conclusively show that Nissalke is not entitled to the requested relief, we affirm

HELD:  The post-conviction court properly determined that the petition and the files and records of the proceeding conclusively showed that appellant was not entitled to relief because his claims are either meritless on their face or Knaffla-barred. Affirmed.

Page (Gildea, Anderson, Dietzen, Stras, Wright, and Lillehaug)

[MURDER]

A14-458,