Prosecutor's failure to warn witness about inadmissible evidence was harmless error, court says
A prosecutor’s alleged failure to properly prepare a murder witness for trial, resulting in his reference to threats that had been excluded as evidence, did not require a new trial for the man who was convicted in the killing, the Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled.
The alleged misconduct in the trial of Vidale Lee Whitson was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, the court said. The Duluth News Tribune has a story, and the Legal Profession Blog has highlights from the March 2 opinion (PDF).
The witness had testified on redirect examination about the reason for inconsistent statements. “I was scared,” the witness said, “and plus, I’ve been getting threats on my family.” Whitson’s defense lawyer had contended the murder witness, not Whitson, was the triggerman in the fatal shooting.
After the defense moved for a mistrial, the prosecutor told the judge he was trying to elicit testimony about the witness’s fears for his own protection, but “the part about the threats I did not expect and I did not attempt to solicit.” The judge asked the prosecutor if he had told the witness not to testify about the threats, and the prosecutor said he had not.
The judge denied the mistrial motion but instructed jurors that they should disregard the witness’s answer, and that both sides had stipulated there were no threats.
The Minnesota Supreme Court said “the alleged misconduct was a single question” and the judge’s instructions to the jury “adequately ameliorated the risk of prejudice.” The court also noted “the strength of the other evidence against Whitson.”
Whitson had filed the appeal pro se, according to the Duluth News Tribune.
