Don't dump your bloody shirt in the back of a pick-up truck, especially if the truck belongs to the deputy sheriff.

2017-M-347            Kevin Terrance Hannon, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.

BACKGROUND:  On September 21, 1999, drug dealer Hannon kicked his girlfriend Deborah Tolhurst to death in their St. Cloud apartment while her wrists were bound behind her back.  She had just told Hannon that she had AIDS.  He then set her body and the apartment ablaze.  The blood and skin cells on his shirt were such a match that they could only be linked to one person in the entire population of the world.  Hannon had changed shirts in the dark parking lot at a bar and discarded the shirt in the back of a pick-up truck, which belonged to a deputy sheriff.

On June 20, 2000, a jury found appellant Kevin Terrance Hannon guilty of one count of premeditated first-degree murder.

On December 20, 2001, the Supreme Court granted Hannon’s direct appeal from his first conviction.  It granted him a new trial because the first judge had admitted Hannon’s confession which police had obtained shortly after he had asked for counsel and said that he did not wish to talk any more.

After a second jury trial, Hannon was found guilty and convicted of first-degree murder while attempting to commit a kidnapping and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of release.

On August 18, 2005, the Supreme Court rejected Hannon’s direct appeal of his conviction in the second trial.

In December, 2006, Hannon filed his first post-conviction appeal.  After a hearing, the post-conviction court held that his claims were either barred by a two-year time limit or because they should have been raised on the direct appeal.  The Supreme Court affirmed Hannon’s conviction and sentence in 20008.

In January, 2009, Hannon filed his second post-conviction appeal.  The post-conviction court held that his claims were either barred by a two-year time limit or because they should have been raised on the direct appeal.  The Supreme Court affirmed Hannon’s conviction and sentence in 2010

In September, 2015, Hannon filed this third post-conviction appeal.  In 200 pages, Hannon filed twelve categories of claims.  Without a hearing, the post-conviction court held that his first 11 categories of claims were barred by the two-year time limit, and the twelfth category of claims relating to sentencing were meritless because they were contradicted by the clear language of the sentencing statute.

Here, the Supreme Court affirmed Hannon’s conviction and sentence for a fourth time in 2017

HELD:  The Supreme Court held:  “The post-conviction court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant’s claims without holding an evidentiary hearing. Affirmed. Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.”

Hudson (Gildea, Anderson, Stras, Lillehaug, Chutich, and McKeig)

Date: February 08, 2017

[              CRIME] [MURDER] [PREMEDITATED] [FIRST-DEGREE]