The Minnesota Supreme Court has denied a request to take up the issue in the Chauvin case that concerns the charge of third-degree murder.
The ruling means it is now up to Judge Cahill whether the charge of third-degree murder will be part of the Chauvin trial. Currently Chauvin faces second-degree unintentional murder and second-degree manslaughter charges.
Supreme Court Order on request to review Chauvin 3rd Degree Murder Charge(Entercom)
Initially, Chauvin faced an additional charge of third-degree murder, but Judge Cahill dismissed that charge and so far has denied a request from the prosecution to reinstate it.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison
"The Supreme Court was right to decline Mr. Chauvin’s petition for review. The Court of Appeals ruled correctly; therefore, there was no need for the Supreme Court to intervene. We believe the charge of 3rd-degree murder is fair and appropriate. We look forward to putting it before the jury, along with charges of 2nd-degree unintentional murder and 2nd-degree manslaughter."
Attorney Mike Bryant of Bradshaw & Bryant, who is not associated with the case, spoke to Paul and Jordana on News Talk 830 WCCO Wednesday afternoon when the ruling came down from the Supreme Court. He explained what the denial means.
“The defense decided to petition to the Supreme Court to see if they would review that,” Bryant told WCCO. “So even though they've taken the review of Noor case they're not going to take the review of the Chauvin case. So they're staying out of it now.
The prosecution has also filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals asking them to stay the trial.”
Bryant makes reference to the Mohamed Noor case. Noor was convicted of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the fatal shooting of Justine Ruszczyk Damond in 2017.
In a decision issued by the Court of Appeals last week, the judge ruled the opinion in the Noor case became a precedent on the day it was issued which Bryant tells WCCO will still be a factor in this case, and a reason why the Supreme Court isn’t taking up the issue.
“We're still waiting for the Court of Appeals to rule on that part of it. So what it does is basically say the Supreme Court is not going to look at it. They're going look at Noor as they said they would. And I guess we're going to get some kind of answer from the Court of Appeals. That is what that means.”
Meanwhile, jury selection has continued Tuesday and Wednesday with the questioning of those in the jury pool. So far five have been seated with the court needed 16 total jurors with four alternates.
