No. 19-7587

Lannon Lavar Burdunice v. Minnesota

Lower Court: Minnesota
Docketed: 2020-02-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: acquittal batson bias character-evidence circumstantial-evidence constitutional-rights criminal-law double-jeopardy due-process evidence incomplete-jury-verdict insufficient-evidence intent-to-kill judicial-error judicial-misconduct jury-instructions jury-verdict prior-convictions prosecutorial-misconduct right-to-be-present right-to-present-defense second-degree-murder weight-of-evidence
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2020-03-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Must my conviction for second degree intentional murder be vacated and a judgement of acquittal entered

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions Presented 1. MUST MY CONVICTION FOR SECOND DEGREE INTENTIONAL MURDER BE VACATED AND A JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL ENTERED INSTEAD WHERE THE JURY’S GUILTY VERDICT GOES AGAINST THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE? 2. IS THE STATE’S CIRCUMSTANTIAL INTENT TO KILL EVIDENCE LEGALLY SUFFICIENT AS A MATTER OF LAW TO SUSTAIN THE CONVICTION FOR SECOND DEGREE INTENTIONAL MURDER? AND AM | CONSTITUTIONALLY ENTITLED TO A JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL? 3. DID THE DISTRICT COURT VIOLATE MY FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRESENT A COMPLETE DEFENSE BY EXCLUDING EVIDENCE SHOWING HOFMANN’S VIOLENT AND AGGRESSIVE CHARACTER AND PAST PATTERN OF AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR? 4. DID THE DISTRICT COURT COMMIT REVERSIBLE ERROR BY ALLOWING THE STATE TO SPECIFY THE NATURE OF MY PRIOR CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLATION OF AN NO-CONTACT ORDER AND THREATS OF VIOLENCE WHEN IMPEACHING MY CREDIBILITY? 5. AM ENTITLED TO A NEW TRIAL BECAUSE THE PROSECUTOR'S PURPORTED REASON FOR REMOVING A BLACK JUROR WAS AN OBVIOUS PRETEXT FOR RACIAL DISCRIMINATION? 6. AM ENTITILED TO A NEW TRIAL DUE TO THE PREJUDICIAL AFFECT OF CUMULATIVE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT? 7. DID CUMULATIVE JUDICIAL ERRORS AND MISCONDUCT VIOLATE MY CONSTITIUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AND RIGHTS TO A FAIR TRIAL, DOUBLE JEOPARDY, DUE PROCESS, AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW? 8. MUST MY CONVICTION FOR INELIGIBLE POSSESSION OF A FIREARM BE VACATED AND MY CASE REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING ON THE MURDER COUNT, WHERE THE DISTRICT COURT DISCHARGED THE JURY WITHOUT COMPLETING THE GUILTY VERDICT AND WITHOUT PROVIDING ME A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO INDIVIDUALLY POLL THE JURORS?

Docket Entries

2020-03-09
Petition DENIED.
2020-02-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.
2020-02-13
Waiver of right of respondent State of Minnesota to respond filed.
2019-12-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 9, 2020)

Attorneys

Lannon L. Burdunice
Lannon Lavar Burdunice — Petitioner
Lannon Lavar Burdunice — Petitioner
State of Minnesota
Jonathan P. SchmidtHennepin County Attorney's Office, Respondent
Jonathan P. SchmidtHennepin County Attorney's Office, Respondent