If you are going to be the prime suspect, don't hide the bloody clothes in your dumpster!

2015-M-286       Jacob Stephen Brown, petitioner, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.

THE CRIME:  On the morning of December 17, 1987, when defendant went to the residence of his estranged girlfriend, Carmen Larson, to pick up some personal property. While there defendant attempted to discuss their relationship. When he refused Larson's request that he leave, Larson went to her bedroom and grabbed a baseball bat.

Defendant admitted that he took the bat from Larson and began hitting her on the head with it. He also admitted that he went into a bedroom and beat Larson's friend, Michelle Raisch, with the bat. Finally, he admitted that he twice grabbed a knife from the kitchen and stabbed Larson a total of 10 times and Raisch at least 21 times. Larson died later that day. Raisch survived and identified defendant as the assailant.

Police arrested defendant at the apartment he shared with his mother. In a warranted search, the police seized a garbage bag containing defendant's bloody clothing from a dumpster behind the apartment building. Police also learned that defendant was under investigation for the theft of a government vehicle and that Larson not only was the government's primary witness against defendant but had given a statement.

THIS APPEAL:  Appellant Jacob Stephen Brown pleaded guilty in 1988 to first-degree murder of his estranged girlfriend, Carmen Larson, and attempted first-degree murder of her friend, M.R.  The district court accepted Brown’s pleas and sentenced him to consecutive terms of life in prison and 130 months. 

After expiration of the post-conviction statute of limitations under Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(a) (2014), Brown filed his fifth request for post-conviction relief, claiming his guilty pleas were not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. 

He argued his claim was not time-barred because it satisfied three of the exceptions to the statute of limitations:  (1) a mental disease precluded a timely assertion of his claim, (2) his claim was based on newly discovered evidence, and (3) the interests of justice required consideration of his claim.  Id., subd. 4(b). 

The post-conviction court summarily denied Brown’s petition as time-barred.1  Because the record conclusively shows that Brown’s claim fails to satisfy any of the exceptions to the post-conviction statute of limitations under Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(b), we affirm.

The post-conviction court did not err when it summarily denied appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief because his claims are time-barred under Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(a) (2014) and none of the exceptions in Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(b), are satisfied.

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

[MURDER]

A14-1542,