887 N.W.2d 692
Minn. Ct. App.2016Background
- Olson drank heavily throughout the day, fell and hit his head, was bleeding, agitated, and behaving erratically; his friend G.R. took over driving and later left after Olson grabbed the keys.
- A state trooper found Olson parked on the highway shoulder, saw signs of intoxication and injury, and ordered him to stay; Olson told the trooper to get his gun and "shoot my ass," then fled and was arrested after a short pursuit.
- While in custody and at the hospital, Olson made multiple hostile statements expressing hope that the trooper (and police generally) would be shot or have their heads blown off; Olson did not state he would carry out those acts himself.
- Olson refused field-sobriety and breath tests and was charged with, inter alia, terroristic threats, test refusal, and fourth-degree DWI; a jury convicted him on all counts.
- On appeal, Olson challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for terroristic threats, the constitutionality of the test-refusal statute, sufficiency of DWI evidence, and whether multiple punishments were barred for offenses from the same conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Olson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Olson's statements were "terroristic threats" | Statements expressing hope the trooper would be shot do not constitute (direct or indirect) threats as a matter of law | Statements were direct evidence of threats and sufficient for conviction | Reversed: statements did not communicate intent to act or indirectly convey a future violent threat; insufficient as a matter of law |
| Whether test-refusal conviction is unconstitutional (McNeely, due process, unconstitutional-conditions) | Statute/ practice violates McNeely, due process, or creates unconstitutional condition | Bernar d/Birchfield and precedent uphold warrantless breath tests incident to arrest and validate test-refusal statute | Affirmed: claim forfeited on appeal; on merits, statute and conviction valid under controlling precedent |
| Sufficiency of evidence for fourth-degree DWI | Evidence insufficient to prove impairment beyond reasonable doubt | Trooper and G.R. observed intoxication; Olson admitted drinking and refused tests | Affirmed: direct eyewitness evidence supported impaired-driving conviction |
| Whether multiple punishments for DWI and test refusal violate Minn. Stat. § 609.035 | Both arise from the same behavioral incident so only one punishment allowed; Olson favored DWI sentence remain | State favored retaining test-refusal sentence | Remand for resentencing: vacate DWI sentence and retain test-refusal sentence (more serious offense) |
Key Cases Cited
- Schweppe v. State, 306 Minn. 395, 237 N.W.2d 609 (Minn. 1975) (defines a threat as a declaration of intent to injure and frames the reasonable-apprehension test)
- Murphy v. State, 545 N.W.2d 909 (Minn. 1996) (protracted harassment and symbolic acts can constitute indirect threats conveying future violent acts)
- State v. Dick, 638 N.W.2d 486 (Minn. App. 2002) (statements to officers about finding and killing them held terroristic threats)
- State v. Jones, 451 N.W.2d 55 (Minn. App. 1990) (threats to harm correctional officers on release deemed terroristic threats)
- State v. Bernard, 859 N.W.2d 762 (Minn. 2015) (warrantless breath tests incident to arrest and the test-refusal statute are constitutionally permissible)
- Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (U.S. 2016) (U.S. Supreme Court affirmed limits and holdings concerning warrantless breath tests incident to arrest)