Shavin appeals against Freud’s conviction and sentence-News

According to documents submitted on Thursday, the former Minneapolis police officer who was convicted of murder in the death of George Floyd intends to appeal his conviction and sentence, saying the judge was in the case Discretion was abused or mistakes were made on several key points.

Derek Chauvin said he intends to appeal on 14 grounds. Among them, he claimed that Judge Peter Cahill abused his discretion when rejecting Chauvan’s request to move the trial out of Hennepin County due to pre-trial propaganda.

He also claimed that the judge abused his discretion when he refused requests to isolate the jury during the trial, as well as requests to postpone the trial or grant a new trial.

Earlier this year, Chauvin was convicted of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter of Freud’s death in 2020 by the state government. He was sentenced to 22.5 years imprisonment-higher than the 12.5 years imprisonment that the judge and the prosecutor agreed that Freud’s death had aggravating factors.

Xiao Wan was also accused by the Federal Court of violating Freud’s civil rights when he knelt on the neck of a black man for about 9.5 minutes because Freud was lying face down on the sidewalk, without resistance and pleading air. He pleaded not guilty to these charges.

Chauvin has 90 days from the sentencing to the submission of notice of his intention to appeal. In addition to his notice, he also filed a motion to suspend the appeal process until the Supreme Court reviewed the earlier decision that refused to allow him to hire a public defender to conduct the appeal on his behalf.

In an affidavit filed on Thursday, Xiao Wan stated that he did not have a lawyer during the appeal process and that he had no income other than a nominal prison salary. His case before Cahill was funded by the Legal Defense Fund of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officials Association.

Xiao Wan wrote: “I was told that their obligation to pay my agency fees ended after I was convicted and sentenced.”

All of Chauvin’s reasons stated in his notice of intent to appeal were previously presented by defense attorney Eric Nelson, as the case is being heard in the district court.

Nelson had previously argued that the fierce publicity surrounding Freud’s death had tainted the jury and that the trial should be withdrawn from Minneapolis. There were reports in February that Xiao Wan was preparing to plead guilty to third-degree murder and announced during the jury selection that Minneapolis had reached a $27 million settlement with Freud’s family.

In addition, during Xiao Wan’s trial, a police officer in the nearby Brooklyn Center shot and killed Daunte Wright, which triggered several days of protests.

Xiaowan’s court documents also stated that the district court also made a mistake when it concluded that Maurice Hall, the man who was with Freud on the day of Freud’s arrest, would not be forced to testify on behalf of the defense. . He also stated that the court made a mistake in allowing prosecutors to provide cumulative evidence about the use of force.

Xiao Wen said that he also intends to argue that Cahill has abused his discretion because he did not allow Xiao Wen to crack down on “obviously biased” jurors for legitimate reasons, when he allowed the state to increase the three-tier murder charge. , He limited the admissibility of evidence. Freud was arrested before, and he rejected Nelson’s request for a new trial after the verdict, and a request for a hearing to question the jurors to investigate suspected misconduct.

Nelson accuses the juror Brandon Mitchell of not being candid during the jury selection, because he did not mention that he participated in the 2020 parade in memory of Pastor Martin Luther King Jr. The prosecutor retorted that Mitchell was open to his views in the jury questionnaire and during the jury’s interrogation.

The judge ruled that neither during the trial nor during the jury selection period that required an evidentiary hearing, the defense did not present any evidence of jury misconduct.