If the police have your name, plates, make and model, and likely escape route, take a different road!

2016-M-312        State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Vidale Lee Whitson, Appellant.

THE CRIME:  On April 24, 2001, Tyrone White (driver) persuaded Vidale Whitson (Shooter) and Ben King (state’s witness) to ride with him from the Twin Cities to Duluth where they would rob and possibly shoot Milton Williams at the apartment of Williams’ friend, T.C.

Milton was shot fatally in the legs and head, robbed of two baggies holding cocaine and $2,915 in cash.  T.C. begged for her life, but was shot in the face and grievously injured.

As the three men fled, T.C. called police to describe the crime.  A neighbor joined the call and described the three men and reported the description and license number of the escape vehicle.

A Duluth police officer spotted the vehicle heading south on I-35 and tracked it until it stopped at a gas station.  The three men were arrested and the baggies of cocaine and cash were recovered.  Ben King agreed to testify against Whitson and White in return for reduced charges and a 150-month sentence.

THE TRIAL AND APPEAL:  In early 2002, a jury convicted Whitson of the first-degree of Milton Williams committed during an aggravated robbery and the first-degree attempted premeditated murder of T.C.  The judge ordered consecutive sentences of life in prison and 180 months for the two crimes.

This appeal is a consolidation of Whitson’s 2002 direct appeal and 2003 post-conviction appeal.  Whitson’s direct appeal was stayed in 2003 so he could prepare a post-conviction appeal.  The district court denied his petition for a hearing on his post-conviction appeal in 2004.  In April, 2005, the Supreme Court dismissed Whitson’s consolidated appeals because he had not advanced them.  However, the Supreme Court granted him a stay of that dismissal.

In January, 2015, Whitson renewed his consolidated appeal, and argued on his five original claims.  The Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and rejected each of his five claims for appeal.

1.      Without deciding whether the prosecutor committed misconduct by failing to adequately prepare a witness and eliciting inadmissible testimony, the alleged misconduct was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

2.      The post-conviction court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s post-conviction claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel without granting an evidentiary hearing.

3.      The State did not fail to disclose material exculpatory evidence to the defense.

4.      The post-conviction court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s claims that the police and prosecutors fabricated evidence without granting an evidentiary hearing.

5.      Omissions from the trial transcript that were later corrected and provided to appellant did not deny him the right to meaningful review of his conviction.

Lillehaug (Gildea, Anderson, Dietzen, and Stras)

Took No Part:  Hudson

               [CRIME] [MURDER] [FIRST-DEGREE] [DRUGS]

Date: March 02, 2016