Darryl Colbert v. State of Minnesota, 2015 Minn. LEXIS 581

Background

In December 2003 Robert Mitchell was fatally shot; Darryl Colbert was tried, convicted of first-degree premeditated murder, and sentenced to life without parole. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal (Colbert I).
Key evidence: surveillance placing Colbert at Sunny’s just before the shooting, witness descriptions of a shooter wearing a brimmed hat and long coat, and testimony connecting Colbert’s white Chrysler New Yorker to the scene and to a related December 27 shooting incident.
Colbert filed multiple postconviction petitions; this decision concerns his sixth petition (2014) alleging: (1) government intimidation of defense witness Howard Wilder, (2) alteration of an aerial photograph (Exhibit 4), (3) juror misconduct, and (4) cumulative error.
The postconviction court summarily denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing; Colbert appealed.
The Supreme Court reviewed whether (a) witness-intimidation claims require per se reversal or harmless-error analysis, (b) juror-misconduct claims were Knaffla-barred, and (c) the Exhibit 4 alteration claim had merit or was time-barred.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Witness intimidation by a government actor	Wilder was threatened by someone he believed was a prosecutor; that interference violated Colbert’s right to present witnesses and warrants per se reversal.	State argued claim is time-barred/procedurally barred and, on the merits, any interference was harmless.	Court held harmless-error analysis applies; even assuming substantial interference, Colbert failed to show prejudice — claim denied.
Juror misconduct	A juror felt pressured to vote guilty; Colbert sought a new trial based on juror affidavits.	State argued the claim was known earlier and is procedurally barred under Knaffla and that the affidavit impermissibly inquired into juror mental processes.	Court held claim Knaffla‑barred; affidavit impermissible under rule 606(b); no interests‑of‑justice excuse shown.
Altered Exhibit 4 (aerial photo)	Exhibit 4 was allegedly altered to show a direct route from KFC lot to crime scene; the State relied on it at trial to argue Colbert’s route was possible.	State argued the exhibit was not altered, the contested features were visible on the exhibit at trial, and the claim is meritless/not new.	Court held Colbert presented no new evidence, failed to show alteration or prejudice, and the claim is meritless.
Cumulative error / entitlement to new trial	Combined effect of alleged witness tampering, juror misconduct, exhibit alteration, and evidentiary inconsistencies deprived Colbert of a fair trial.	State argued individual claims lack merit or are barred; record does not show prejudice.	Court held no cumulative error warranting reversal; conviction affirmed.

Key Cases Cited

Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (recognition of defendant’s right to call witnesses as due process right)
Webb v. Texas, 409 U.S. 95 (trial judge’s conduct can coerce witness refusal to testify)
Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (distinction between structural and trial error; harmless‑error framework)
Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (most constitutional errors are subject to harmless‑error review)
United States v. Thomas, 488 F.2d 334 (6th Cir. — government interference with witness and substantial‑interference discussion)
State v. Graham, 764 N.W.2d 340 (Minn. 2009) (substantial interference test applied in Minnesota)
State v. Knaffla, 243 N.W.2d 737 (Minn. 1976) (bar on claims known but not raised on direct appeal)
Colbert v. State (Colbert I), 716 N.W.2d 647 (Minn. 2006) (direct‑appeal decision affirming conviction)
Colbert v. State (Colbert II), 811 N.W.2d 103 (Minn. 2012) (prior postconviction appeal addressing timeliness)