From MN Bench Book - Trial Procedures & Practices for Judges
A. Important Procedural Elements of Rasmussen Hearings
Defendant's Right to be Present
The defendant has a right to be present at the hearing.
The defendant need not be present in chambers during discussions about the case.
Later Use of Defendant's Rasmussen Statements
Defendant’s testimony at Rasmussen hearing cannot be used against him at trial.
It is probably okay to use defendant’s Rasmussen statement against him for impeachment.
Florence Hearing Impact
The defendant cannot call victim at a Florence hearing.
Burden of Proof
The burden of proof at a Rasmussen hearing is a preponderance of the evidence.
Rasmussen Hearing Review at Trial?
What’s done is done. The trial judgment should not reconsider the Omnibus judge's ruling unless “new evidence” or “extraordinary” circumstances exist.
- See State ex. rel Rasmussen v. Tahash, 141 N.W.2d 3 (Minn. 1965) (defendant must be physically present during all pre-trial proceedings).
- See State v. Holmes, 374 N.W.2d 457 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
- See State v. Bauman, 354 N.W.2d 1,8 (Minn. 1984); Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.03, subd. 1.
- See id. at 8, 9; United States v. Gunter, 631 F.2d 583, 589 (8th Cir. 1980) (motions and arguments here were issues of law which did not compel the defendant’s presence).
- Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 (1968); State v. VanWert, 199 N.W.2d 514 (Minn. 1972) (but it is okay to use statements made by defendant during bail hearings against him at trial).
- See United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83, 93-94, n.8 (1980).
- See State v. Rud, 359 N.W.2d 573 (Minn. 1984) (defendant must first make a “persuasive” offer of proof that evidence will exonerate him); State v. Florence, 239 N.W.2d 892 (Minn. 1966)).
- See Lego v. Twomey, 404 U.S. 477 (1972); State v. Wajda, 206 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1973).
- See State v. Coe, 298 N.W.2d 770 (Minn. 1980); State v. Clark, 442 N.W.2d 832 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989).