State v. Baldwin

State of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Jennifer Lynn Baldwin, Appellant.

No. A19-1677

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

April 18, 2022

This opinion is nonprecedential except as provided by Minn. R Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c).

Hennepin County District Court File No. 27-CR-18-23849

Keith Ellison, Attorney General, St. Paul, Minnesota; and Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, Brittany D. Lawonn Assistant County Attorney, Minneapolis, Minnesota (for respondent)

Cathryn Middlebrook, Chief Appellate Public Defender, Sara L. Martin, Assistant Public Defender, St. Paul, Minnesota (for appellant)

Considered and decided by Johnson, Presiding Judge; Reyes, Judge; and Cochran, Judge.

OPINION

COCHRAN, JUDGE

A jury found appellant guilty of two counts of felony second-degree murder in connection with the death of a nine-month-old child. In this appeal, following postconviction proceedings, appellant argues that she is entitled to a new trial because the district court abused its discretion by denying her request to postpone the scheduled trial due to the unavailability of an expert witness. In the alternative, she argues that a new trial is required because she received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Relatedly, she contends that the district court erred by denying her postconviction request for funds to retain an expert witness to support her claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Finally, appellant argues that her sentence must be reversed because the district court erred by imposing an upward sentencing departure based on factors related to the victim's age when age was an element of the offense.

We first conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's pretrial motion for a continuance of the trial. We next conclude that appellant did not meet her burden to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel and would not have met her burden even with the proposed expert testimony in postconviction proceedings. Given this conclusion, we decline to address whether the district court erred by denying appellant's request for funds to retain an expert for postconviction proceedings. Finally, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion when it imposed an upward sentencing departure based on the victim's particular vulnerability due to age, because the victim's age is an element of the underlying offense. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand to the district court for resentencing.

FACTS

Nine-month-old C.S. tragically died after sustaining a serious head injury on March 15, 2018. On that day, C.S. woke up early at home. C.S.'s father gave him a bottle and put C.S. in bed with his mother before leaving for work around 6:50 a.m C.S.'s mother woke up not too long after C.S.'s father left. She planned to drop off C.S. at appellant Jennifer Lynn Baldwin's house later that morning on her way to work. Baldwin regularly took care of C.S. while his parents were at work.

Before going to Baldwin's house, C.S.'s mother arranged to go to a friend's house and for the friend to watch C.S. while C.S.'s mother showered and got ready for work. C.S.'s mother drove to the friend's house, which was only a few minutes away, around 8:45 a.m. Right before leaving for the friend's house, while still in the driveway at home, C.S. vomited in the car-so much that it was dripping through the bottom of the car seat and C.S.'s clothes were wet. C.S.'s mother changed C.S. after arriving at the friend's house, and the friend watched C.S. while his mother showered.

After getting ready for work, C.S.'s mother took C.S. to Baldwin's house. They arrived around 10:25 a.m. C.S. started crying when his mother handed him to Baldwin, which was unusual. C.S.'s mother had to leave for work and left C.S. with Baldwin while he was still crying. Because of C.S.'s unusual response, C.S.'s mother asked his father to pick him up from Baldwin's house early that day.

At 11:39 a.m., Baldwin called C.S.'s mother, saying, "[Y]ou need to get here, [C.S.'s] eyes are rolling back in his head and he won't stop crying." C.S.'s mother told Baldwin to call 911 and that C.S.'s father could get there faster than she could. Baldwin then called C.S.'s father, who also told Baldwin to call 911. Baldwin called 911 at 11:46 a.m. and asked the operator to send an ambulance. Police officers, who were the first to arrive on the scene, saw that C.S. was having trouble breathing, could not hold his head up, and appeared lethargic and unresponsive. An ambulance arrived at 11:58 a.m. and immediately took C.S. to the hospital.

At the hospital, a CT scan showed that C.S. had suffered a brain injury that caused a hemorrhage-bleeding in the brain. C.S. underwent two emergency surgeries to remove the hemorrhage and reduce the resulting swelling. But subsequent scans showed that C.S.'s chances of survival were "very low." C.S. ultimately passed away on March 20, 2018.

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner's office conducted an autopsy of C.S. following his death. The two doctors who conducted the autopsy found that C.S. had a very severe brain injury. The doctors also noted multiple bruises, including on the left side of C.S.'s head, the back of his right ear, his abdomen, the bicep of each arm, and his buttocks-injuries that were not likely caused by C.S.'s emergency surgeries. Based on the autopsy findings, the medical examiner's office certified the cause of death as blunt force trauma to the head and the manner of death as homicide.

Law enforcement officers interviewed Baldwin on the day C.S. was hospitalized and again on the following day. They conducted a third interview in July. During the third interview, Baldwin admitted for the first time that she had handled C.S. "roughly." And she admitted that she had never handled a child as roughly as she handled C.S. on the day in question. She explained that she had been under significant stress because of issues involving her own children, financial concerns, and a family member's recent attempted suicide. Baldwin also said that she was sleep-deprived and had not taken her ADHD medication that morning. But she denied physically shaking C.S.

In September, respondent State of Minnesota charged Baldwin with two counts of second-degree unintentional murder: one count of second-degree murder while committing third-degree assault involving substantial bodily harm, and one count of second-degree murder while committing third-degree assault of a victim under four. See Minn. Stat. §§ 609.19, subd. 2(1), .223, subds. 1, 3 (2016). Baldwin pleaded not guilty, and the district court set a trial date for June 2019.

Pretrial Proceedings

After the district court denied a motion from Baldwin to dismiss the case for lack of probable cause, Baldwin sought an expert witness from the National Autopsy Assay Group (NAA Group) to testify at trial. The NAA Group accepted the case in March 2019, and the district court approved funding for the group's services. On May 24, 2019, Baldwin requested a continuance because an NAA Group forensic expert whom Baldwin expected to call at trial had "recently" been hospitalized. As a result, the expert was unable to complete his forensic analysis and would be unable to testify at trial. Baldwin argued that without the expert's testimony she would not be able to present a complete defense. The state objected to the continuance request. After hearing from the parties, the district court denied the request.

Following the denial, Baldwin took additional steps related to expert testimony before the trial started. On May 30, she filed a Frye-Mack motion to challenge one of the state's proposed expert witnesses, which the district court denied. On June 3, Baldwin requested funding and a continuance to procure expert assistance from a biomechanical engineer. The district court denied her request for a continuance but authorized compensation for the expert's services.

Jury Trial and Sentencing

On June 10, 2019, the jury trial began. The state presented testimony from C.S.'s parents, the friend who watched C.S. before his mother dropped him off at Baldwin's home, and four medical professionals: a paramedic who responded to Baldwin's 911 call, the neurosurgeon who operated on C.S., and two doctors from the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office who conducted C.S.'s autopsy.

Both of C.S.'s parents and the friend testified that they knew of no incident that could have caused C.S.'s injury before he arrived at Baldwin's house. And they denied noticing any injury to C.S. in their interactions with him on that morning or the night before.

The medical-professional witnesses provided testimony about C.S.'s medical condition, the severity of C.S.'s injuries, and his cause of death. The paramedic who responded to Baldwin's 911 call testified that it was immediately clear that C.S. needed to be taken to the hospital because he was "very pale, limp, and did not appear to be responding appropriately." The paramedic also noted that C.S. suffered from a seizure on the way to the hospital. The neurosurgeon testified that a CT scan done at the hospital showed that C.S. had a very large brain hemorrhage. The two doctors who conducted C.S.'s autopsy testified about the autopsy results.

The medical-professional witnesses also testified about the possible timing of C.S.'s injuries-the main issue disputed at trial-and the medical concept of "compensation."

The paramedic who responded to Baldwin's 911 call testified that she could not tell when C.S. had been injured. She also testified that children will "compensate," or not show symptoms, after they have been injured for longer periods of time than adults will- "meaning you won't really know they...