STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, Appellant, v. Byron David SMITH, Appellant, Respondent, 2016 Minn. LEXIS 117

Background

Byron Smith shot and killed Nicholas Brady and Haile Kifer in his basement on November 22, 2012; Smith recorded his own statements and audio of events and later admitted the shootings to police.
Smith was indicted by a grand jury on two counts of first‑degree premeditated murder; he was tried, convicted of two counts of first‑degree murder, and sentenced to concurrent life terms without release.
Pretrial and grand‑jury disputes included alleged grand‑jury procedural errors, presentation of “spark‑of‑life” evidence, and whether the grand jury received proper instructions on premeditation.
At trial the court limited certain defense evidence about prior burglaries (who committed them, shoe‑tread linkage, testimony from alleged co‑perpetrators), excluded a live showing of a previously stolen shotgun but admitted a photo, and excluded an expert on critical‑incident stress.
The courtroom gallery was briefly cleared for a short, transcribed bench‑type discussion about a written evidentiary ruling on April 21, 2014; Smith objected that this closure violated his right to a public trial.
Post‑trial, the district court denied restitution awards for victims’ headstone estimates; the appellate contest turned on whether Smith timely challenged restitution per Minn. Stat. § 611A.045.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Grand‑jury irregularities and cumulative error	Smith: multiple grand jury errors (procedure, improper impeachment, disclosure of complaint charges, faulty premeditation instruction, spark‑of‑life evidence) required dismissal	State: errors were immaterial; overwhelming probable cause and grand jury independence cure any defects	Court: affirmed denial of dismissal; errors were immaterial or harmless given abundant probable cause and safeguards
Prosecutor questioning/impeachment before grand jury	Smith: prosecutor’s repeated questioning of W.A. improperly impeached witness and influenced grand jury	State: questioning did not substantially influence grand jury given other evidence	Held: misconduct troubling but not substantially influential under Montanaro test; no dismissal
Spark‑of‑life evidence in grand jury	Smith: such evidence is irrelevant and prejudicial in grand‑jury proceedings	State: grand jury may hear spark‑of‑life like at trial	Held: grand jury may hear limited spark‑of‑life evidence; must be used with care; here presentation was limited and not prejudicial
Closure of courtroom to public (public‑trial right)	Smith: clearing the gallery for the court’s explanation of evidentiary ruling violated Sixth Amendment public‑trial right	State: the brief proceeding resembled an administrative/bench conference and did not implicate the public‑trial guarantee	Held: closure was an administrative bench‑type proceeding (on the record, transcribed, brief, prior public hearings and written order existed); no Sixth Amendment violation (concurring justice would have framed the analysis differently)
Exclusion of defense evidence / right to present a defense	Smith: court improperly excluded witnesses linking victims to prior burglaries, barred testimony about shotgun functionality, excluded stress‑reaction expert and tread‑pattern linkage	State: exclusions were within Rule 403 discretion or harmless	Held: most exclusions were proper under Rule 403 or harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; exclusion of testimony about shotgun functionality was erroneous but harmless in context
Prosecutorial remark in closing about alleged words on recording	Smith: prosecutor asked jury to consider Kifer said “I’m sorry,” contrary to court’s prior ruling; judge failed to give promised curative instruction	State: remark was an argument about ambiguous evidence	Held: prosecutor’s comment was an allowable argument about a debatable auditory inference; not misconduct requiring reversal
Restitution for headstones — timeliness	State: Smith waived challenge to headstone restitution by filing affidavit late and failing to meet burden	Smith: contest preserved	Held: Smith’s detailed sworn affidavit was served late (after the 5 business‑day requirement); district court erred in finding it timely; reversed and restitution awarded for headstones

Key Cases Cited

Dobbins v. State, 788 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. 2010) (presumption of regularity attaches to indictments; heavy burden to overturn)
Montanaro v. State, 463 N.W.2d 281 (Minn. 1990) (test for dismissing indictment for prosecutorial misconduct before grand jury)
Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (1984) (public‑trial closure test: overriding interest, narrowness, alternatives, findings)
State v. Penkaty, 708 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 2006) (admissibility of prior violent acts to show defendant’s apprehension requires defendant’s knowledge)
State v. Morrow, 834 N.W.2d 715 (Minn. 2013) (spark‑of‑life evidence allowed at trial if not unfairly inflammatory)
State v. Grose, 887 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986) (grand‑jury concurrence and indictment form issues)
State v. Inthavong, 402 N.W.2d 799 (Minn. 1987) (prejudice required to invalidate indictment for erroneous grand jury instruction)
State v. Moore, 481 N.W.2d 355 (Minn. 1992) (premeditation requires some passage of time)