Homicide, Murder, Manslaughter Without Prejudice?

[welkin]

You quoted the article correctly (the opinion says). It was the author that was incorrect.

 

[Steven Hinshaw]

Back in August of this year AK Public Media covered the reversal of my earlier conviction for Manslaughter related to the shooting death of Airforce Military Police Officer Crystal St. Auburn.

Yesterday I received notice that the current State's Attorney General has decided to dismiss the case in its entirety instead of having a retrial. Not only did they dismiss my charges they also reversed the charges of codefendant/state's witnesses Regina Bibbs and Dorian Dixon.

It's not lost on me that I'm fortunate to carry on with my life after 19 years, however recent circumstances call me to beg the question as to why and how.

I was anticipating the retrial of an absolutely biased and subjective investigation that lended to (2) perjured grand jury indictments that this case rested upon.

Once the state was officially made aware (put on notice that the defense was aware) of the perjury of multiple states witnesses via recorded evidence( the initial 911 call) instead of dismissing their case, they doubled down and granted offers of full immunity to their witnesses in exchange for further "truthful testimony" in what was their 4th account of events.

How is it that 19 years has passed and life has happened for everybody not incarcerated related to the homicide, while I sat dealing with subpar representation against a biased investigation and a prosecution team backed by a big oil state budget(at the time), that now has resulted in a complete dismissal of their whole original case narrative?

Justice working in mysterious ways?

Then State's prosecutor Sharon Marshall would have you believe that my acquittal of the murder and Weapons counts was the result of a single "bad juror," while in fact that "bad juror" was the only one who was willing to adhere to the legal requirement of "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the face of a Charlie Sheen esque jury foreperson who was absolutely willing to forgo the deliberation process as well as persuade the remaining jurors into seeing things his way... as in "I think we all know he's guilty;" as opposed to you know weighing the credibility of all witnesses and evidence fairly in relation to the laws that govern all citizens, including our valued members of law enforcement.

It was telling when the jury acquitted me of the weapons charge, based on the fact that under those circumstances a reasonable person wouldve been both legally and morally justified in discharging a firearm, both in defense of self and others. How is it that I could be not guilty of the weapons charge, yet guilty of the homicide, when there exists a theory within the law known as transferred intent?

In my case the prosecution could not resist the temptation and desire to tout their worthiness as public officials who put bad guys away, and further pad their their State budget, salary and pensions... all on the back of one of many overcharged and wrongfully imprisoned citizens of Alaska.

Think not? Then explain the exponential growth of the prisoner population, including probationers and parolees and pretrial defendants on pretrial supervision... then justify the absence created in the lives of all their children who more often than not grow up to also become a part of the criminal justice system... then tell me it's worth it.

Alaskas legislators have a bigger problem than policy, it's a law enforcement culture that long ago stepped away from the idea of peace keeping... its prison for profit... in support of further constitutionally questionable measures and ventures creating industry for the like minded.

I want my day in court. I want to be retried fairly. I shouldn't have to live out my life, one negligent police officer or overzealous prosecutor away from being over charged, discriminated against or killed in a pretrial correctional complex, simply because I lacked a high school education or because I was frustrated with subpar legal representation because my life circumstances didn't provide hundreds of thousands of dollars in law school education.

Then State needs to actually adhere to the fact finding process, a dismissal without prejudice is not acceptable. I've requested my public defender to file a cross motion demanding the court enter an innocence and/or a lack of evidence determination... but as before I'm willing to bet they also won't honor their obligation to act according to the State and Federal Constitional rights of just another Alaskan.

Why not?

Respectfully

Steven Hinshaw

Update... on October 31st I filed a motion requesting permission to file a pro se motion... wherein I requested the court to not just order the dismissal but to dismiss with prejudice based or innocence or lack of evidence... initially the docket reflected that I was represented so I could not file on my own behalf... however recently the docket has been updated to reflect that my request has been granted and the court is now considering my innocence and lack of evidence claims... what should be my next course of action?

 

[Tax Counsel]

what should be my next course of action?

I couldn't tell you that for two reasons. First, I don't have all the information needed to know what would be the next step for you. Second, even if I did, it would amount to the unauthorized practice of law (UPL) to give specific legal advice in this forum as I am not licensed to practice in your state. You'll need to ask a local lawyer for advice on that. You may not get that "day in court" (if you mean a new trial) that you say that you want, at least with regard to the charges you were previously convicted on and that have now been dismissed. The Constitution's protection against double jeopardy would prevent the state from bringing those charges again.