• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Chauvin trial verdict.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

aldaron

Member
What is the name of your state? MN
Chauvin was found guilty of 3 charges, murder 2, murder 3 and 2nd degree manslaughter. Watching court proceeding on TV usually the jury will have choices to choose from when finding one guilty and always pick just one. Say they chose murder2 then the other 2 are moot. When they find him guilty of the man 2 charge it seems it would negate the other 2 more serious charges because of intent. I just don't understand being guilty of all 3 when all need different findings to be found guilty of. Is this a quirk in MN law? It just doesn't make sense. Also will the most serious charge be the sentence that matters? What happens to the lessor 2 charges at sentencing? Being found guilty of those 3 charges is that a reason to win an appeal?
 


quincy

Senior Member
What is the name of your state? MN
Chauvin was found guilty of 3 charges, murder 2, murder 3 and 2nd degree manslaughter. Watching court proceeding on TV usually the jury will have choices to choose from when finding one guilty and always pick just one. Say they chose murder2 then the other 2 are moot. When they find him guilty of the man 2 charge it seems it would negate the other 2 more serious charges because of intent. I just don't understand being guilty of all 3 when all need different findings to be found guilty of. Is this a quirk in MN law? It just doesn't make sense. Also will the most serious charge be the sentence that matters? What happens to the lessor 2 charges at sentencing? Being found guilty of those 3 charges is that a reason to win an appeal?
Each charge comes with different penalties (maximum sentences of 40, 25, 10 years). Conviction on all three charges in Minnesota can possibly work to enhance the penalty at sentencing, but not beyond the 40 year maximum for the most serious charge (murder 2) for Chauvin because all charges resulted from the same crime.

Had Chauvin been convicted of 3 different crimes, he could have been sentenced to 3 concurrent terms (serving 40 years at the same time as serving 25 and 10) or consecutive terms (serving 40 + 25 + 10 or 75 years).

As it is, under sentencing guidelines, Chauvin could be sentenced to (a maximum of) 40 years but, since this is his first (charged) crime, he probably will be sentenced to far less (but probably more than the minimum under the guidelines of 12.5 years).
 
Last edited:

Taxing Matters

Overtaxed Member
What is the name of your state? MN
Chauvin was found guilty of 3 charges, murder 2, murder 3 and 2nd degree manslaughter. Watching court proceeding on TV usually the jury will have choices to choose from when finding one guilty and always pick just one. Say they chose murder2 then the other 2 are moot. When they find him guilty of the man 2 charge it seems it would negate the other 2 more serious charges because of intent. I just don't understand being guilty of all 3 when all need different findings to be found guilty of. Is this a quirk in MN law? It just doesn't make sense. Also will the most serious charge be the sentence that matters? What happens to the lessor 2 charges at sentencing? Being found guilty of those 3 charges is that a reason to win an appeal?
He committed one act, but the jury found that one act met all the requirements for all three of the charged crimes. However, because it was just a single act, he may only be sentenced for violating one of them — which will be the most serious offense, the 2nd degree murder charge. Nevertheless, the three convictions do serve a purpose here because if for some reason the 2nd degree murder charge were to get tossed out on appeal he could still be sentenced for the next most serious of the convictions. So what the prosecution did here was set this up to provide the best assurance that (1) the jury would find him guilty of at least one of the offenses and (2) that if the jury convicted him of two or more offenses, there would be a back up if the more serious offense(s) get tossed out on appeal.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top