Cass County District Court File No. K1011174
Considered and decided by Schumacher, Presiding Judge, Randall, Judge,
and Kalitowski, Judge.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robert H. Schumacher, Judge
Appellant Dallas Wayne Smith challenges his conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct, arguing (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel and (2) the district court abused its discretion by denying his discovery motion for an in camera review of certain evidence. Smith also raises several arguments in his pro se supplemental brief. We affirm.
As a result of events occurring during the evening of October 9-10, 2001, Smith was charged with four counts of criminal sexual conduct: two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.342, subd. 1(c), (e)(i) (2000) (sexual penetration causing fear of great bodily harm and sexual penetration causing personal injury by use of force); one count of second-degree criminal sexual conduct, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.343, subd. 1(e)(i) (2000) (sexual contact causing personal injury); and one count of third-degree criminal sexual conduct, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.344, subd. 1(c) (2000) (sexual penetration using force or coercion).
The complaint alleged the following facts: near midnight on October 9, 2001, Cass Lake police officers responding to a residential call observed a woman later identified as S.W. walking west on Second Street. The police also saw a man later identified as Smith walking approximately one block behind S.W.
Approximately one hour later, police officers on routine patrol found S.W. lying in the street less than one block from where they had seen her earlier. She was crying uncontrollably. The police transported S.W. to the hospital, where she stated a man had grabbed her on the street and sexually assaulted her. A vaginal swab of S.W. tested positive for semen. The physical description S.W. gave of her assailant matched that of the man police had seen walking behind S.W. Police identified the man as Smith, whom they arrested.
A DNA profiling analysis performed by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension on a known sample of Smith's blood indicated the semen found in S.W.'s vagina was Smith's.
Before trial began, Smith filed a discovery motion to compel the state to produce for in camera review
[a]ll psychological assessments, medical reports, or other documentation pertaining to [S.W.]'s mental or emotional condition, all of which may have a bearing on credibility, ability to remember or recall events, and her emotional state.
The state subsequently amended the complaint to eliminate any charge based on S.W.'s mental impairment or incapacitation. The court denied Smith's discovery motion, reasoning Smith's mental state was not relevant.
At trial, Smith's counsel conceded intercourse had taken place, but argued the intercourse was consensual and therefore lawful. Smith's counsel stipulated to the admission of the DNA ...