===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-21-8412_Finding of Incompetency and Order_2023-08-08_20240430081737.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-21-8412 defendant: Stephone Ahmad Gammage filing_type: Finding of Incompetency and Order filing_date: 2023-08-08 pages: 005 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/005 ===== Filed in District Court State of Minnesota Aug 09, 2023 3:53 pm STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CRIMINAL DIVISION Court File No. 27-CR-21-8412 State of Minnesota, FINDINGS OF FACT, Plaintiff, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER REGARDING vs. COMPETENCY Stephone Ahmad Gammage, Defendant. This matter came before the undersigned Referee of District Court on August 8, 2023. The hearing was held remotely using the Zoom internet platform. Tom Arneson, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, represented the plaintiff. Defendant appeared in custody and was represented by Kevin Gray, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender. Based on all the files, records and proceedings in this case, the Court makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Defendant (date of birth 07/01/1987), was charged in MNCIS file 27-CR-21-8412 with 2nd Degree Assault (Felony) and 3rd Degree Assault (Felony) arising from an incident alleged to have occurred on April 28, 2021. On December 7, 2022, Judge Hilary Caligiuri found probable cause to believe that the offenses were committed and that Defendant committed them. 2. On July 11, 2023, Judge Kerry Meyer ordered that Defendant undergo an evaluation to assess Defendant’s competency to proceed in this matter pursuant to Minn. R. Crim. P. 20.01. 3. Dr. John R. Anderson, Ph.D., LP, Psychological Services of Hennepin County District Court, reviewed Defendant’s records, interviewed Defendant, and filed a written report with this Court. 4. Dr. John R. Anderson, Ph.D., LP, Psychological Services of Hennepin County District Court, opined that Defendant, due to mental illness or cognitive impairment, lacks the ability to rationally consult with counsel; or lacks the ability to understand the proceedings or participate in the defense. This opinion was uncontested by either party. ===== PAGE 002/005 ===== CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Defendant is presently incompetent to stand trial. ORDER 1. The criminal proceedings in this matter are suspended until Defendant is restored to competency to proceed. While suspended, the criminal court retains authority over the criminal case including, but not limited to, bail or conditions of release. 2. Copies of this Order shall be served upon counsel for the parties and any objections to this Order shall be filed with the Court within ten (10) days of the date of service. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney – Criminal Division; David Desmidt, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender 3. The Hennepin County Prepetition Screening Program (PSP) must conduct a prepetition screening pursuant to the Minnesota Commitment and Treatment Act and make a recommendation as to whether the defendant should be civilly committed under the Act. 4. PSP shall investigate whether civil commitment should be pursued and forward a recommendation in a written report supporting or not supporting civil commitment to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office – Adult Services Division (“HCAO-ASD”) within five (5) days of receiving this Order. 5. Prepetition Screening shall provide copies of the Rule 20 Competency Evaluation, the criminal Complaint(s), and the underlying police report(s) along with its written recommendation to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office – Adult Services Division. 6. Defendant is ordered to cooperate with the civil commitment process including appearing at all court appearances in the civil and criminal cases. 7. Members of PSP shall have access to all Defendant’s files and records, including those protected by Federal regulation or law. This Order grants the members of PSP access to the records of any individual or entity that has provided observation, evaluation, diagnosis, care, treatment, or confinement of the Defendant. This Order applies to, but is not limited to, records maintained by: Minnesota Fourth Judicial District Court Psychological Services; chemical dependency evaluators and treatment providers; health clinics; medical centers and hospitals; physicians; psychologists; mental health care providers; case managers; parole and probation agencies; residential and nonresidential community mental health treatment facilities or 2 ===== PAGE 003/005 ===== programs; regional treatment centers; the Minnesota Department of Corrections; the correctional authority for any other state; schools and school districts; law enforcement agencies; and the Court’s own records. 8. This Order also authorizes employees or officers of the record keepers described above to discuss the Defendant’s condition, history, treatment, and/or status with the members of PSP. Information collected by PSP pursuant to this Order shall be considered private data on the Defendant, but it may be included in the written report produced by PSP and forwarded to the HCAO-ASD. 9. If the Fourth Judicial District Court – Probate/Mental Health Division finds the Defendant to be mentally ill, developmentally disabled, chemically dependent, or mentally ill and dangerous to the public, the Defendant may be committed directly to an appropriate safe and secure facility. The Hennepin County Sheriff shall transport the Defendant from the Hennepin County Adult Detention Center to the custody of the head of the facility named in the order for civil commitment when notified that placement is available for the Defendant. 10. The head of the treatment facility shall submit a written report addressing the Defendant’s competency to proceed in the criminal case when the Defendant has attained competency, or at least every six months. 11. Psychological Services of Hennepin County District Court, or the Department of Human Services Forensic Evaluation Department if the defendant is civilly committed, shall have access to Defendant's treatment records to prepare the required report(s) on the defendant’s mental condition with an opinion as to competency to proceed. By presentation of a copy of this order, whether mailed, sent electronically, discussed verbally, or personally delivered, the custodian of records for any agency, department, or health care provider shall release all information and/or records related to Defendant, including medical, psychological, behavioral, social service, probation/correctional, developmental disability, military, Social Security, employment, and educational records, to the agency requesting the records within 72 hours. This Order shall be sufficient to require an agency, department, entity, or health care provider to release the requested information and/or records related to treatment Defendant has received in connection with that facility. Any of the defendant’s records released pursuant to this order may not be disclosed to any other person without court authorization or Defendant's signed consent. 3 ===== PAGE 004/005 ===== 12. The criminal conditions of release remain in effect until placement at an appropriate facility can occur. 13. If Defendant is not subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 253B.18, the head of the treatment facility shall hold Defendant safe and secure under the civil commitment, and shall not permit the Defendant’s release, institutional transfer, partial institutionalization status, discharge, or provisional discharge of the civil commitment until the Fourth Judicial District Court – Criminal Division has ordered conditions of release consistent with the proposed change in status. Any proposed change in status under the civil commitment requiring amended conditions of release shall be made in writing to the Fourth Judicial District Court – Criminal Division and parties at least 14 days prior to proposed change in status. The written proposal shall address the following issues 1) whether the Defendant is competent to proceed; 2) how the proposed plan will meet the Defendant’s treatment needs; and 3) public safety risks and how they will be addressed. Either party may request a hearing to address the proposed changes to the conditions of release. If no hearing is requested, the court may issue an order amending the conditions of release consistent with the proposed change in status in the civil commitment matter. 14. In the event the Fourth Judicial District Court – Mental Health Division does not commit the Defendant, then the Defendant shall be transported in secure custody back to the Fourth Judicial District Court – Criminal Division for further proceedings herein. 15. Defendant’s next appearance in Hennepin County District Court – Criminal Division on this matter and status review of Defendant’s competence to proceed is February 6, 2024. One week prior to that date, reports regarding Defendant’s competency and mental status shall be e-filed and e-served to: a. Fourth Judicial District Court – 4thCriminalRule20 email list; b. David Desmidt, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender; c. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney; d. Assistant Hennepin County Attorney’s Office – Adult Services Division (if a commitment is ordered); e. The Commitment Defense Panel attorney appointed to represent Defendant by the Fourth Judicial District Court – Probate/Mental Health Division. 4 ===== PAGE 005/005 ===== 16. A copy of this Order, the Rule 20.01 Competency Evaluation, the criminal complaint(s), and the underlying police report(s) shall be delivered via email to the Prepetition Screening Program of Hennepin County’s Human Services and Public Health Department. Order Recommended By: BY THE COURT: Referee of District Court Judge of District Court 5 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-21-8412_Transcript_2023-07-20_20240430081739.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-21-8412 defendant: Stephone Ahmad Gammage filing_type: Transcript filing_date: 2023-07-20 pages: 011 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 1 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT 2 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ) 4 State of Minnesota, ) Transcript of Proceedings ) 5 Plaintiff, Court File Number: ) vs. 27-CR-21-8412 6 ) Stephone Ahmad Gammage, ) 7 ) Defendant. ) 8 ) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9 10 The above-entitled matter came before the 11 Honorable Kerry W. Meyer, Judge of District Court, at the 12 Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis, 13 Minnesota on July 11th, 2023 at 9:12 a.m. 14 15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 16 A P P E A R A N C E S 17 Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, appeared on behalf of the State of Minnesota. 18 19 David DeSmidt, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender, appeared on behalf of the Defendant, Stephon Ahmad 20 Gammage. 21 Geoffrey Isaacman, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender, appeared on behalf of the Defendant, Stephon 22 Ahmad Gammage. 23 Transcribed by: 24 Erin R. Watson Official Court Reporter 25 Minneapolis, Minnesota ===== PAGE 002/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 2 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 THE COURT: All right, we're on the record, 3 State of Minnesota vs. Stephone Gammage, Court File 4 27-CR-21-8412. Counsel, please note appearances. 5 MS. PEREZ: Good morning, Your Honor, 6 Jacqueline Perez -- that's P-E-R-E-Z -- Assistant 7 County Attorney, on behalf of the State. 8 MR. DeSMIDT: May it please the Court, David 9 DeSmidt, appearing with Mr. Gammage, who is also 10 present in custody, seated next to me, Your Honor. 11 Geoffrey Isaacman from my office is also present. 12 THE COURT: All right. I've received updates 13 since we were together yesterday about a few things. 14 But I'm going to start with the State's request. At 15 least as of yesterday, you are going to make a motion, 16 I believe, Ms. Perez? 17 MS. PEREZ: That's correct, Your Honor. 18 After -- there was a number of events that happened 19 yesterday in this case when we were set to begin 20 trial. The State has -- is making a Rule 20 Motion 21 today and would ask the Court to order a Rule 20 for 22 defendant. 23 At -- the basis for this request, Your Honor, 24 is yesterday, when we reported to Your Honor, the 25 State observed a significant amount of concerns in ===== PAGE 003/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 3 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 terms of defendant's demeanor, his words, what he was 2 saying. The defendant has had three evaluations, 3 three Rule 20 evaluations before, two of which he has 4 been found incompetent. This last evaluation that was 5 completed in January of 2023, he was found competent; 6 however, that did not include an extensive interview 7 with the defendant. 8 If Your Honor is not inclined to order an 9 updated Rule 20, as previously noted, the State is 10 ready to proceed, I have my witnesses aligned; 11 however, I would also note that there are also 12 logistical concerns that we have not discussed. 13 I did get in touch with my paralegal last 14 night, and I told her to start getting the laptop 15 prepped, just in case that is the route that we are 16 going in. So the State is definitely doing what it 17 can; however, at the top of that list -- and I would 18 like to put this on the record, that I do have 19 significant concerns moving forward in a trial where I 20 do believe there -- there may be some mental health 21 concerns and perhaps incompetence on the part of 22 defendant, given his history and Rule 20 evaluations 23 and given his demeanor from yesterday and appearing 24 before the Court. 25 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. DeSmidt, anything ===== PAGE 004/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 4 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 you want to say about the motion? 2 MR. GAMMAGE: I object. We would not be doing 3 the Rule 20. 4 THE COURT: For the record, that's 5 Mr. Gammage, not Mr. DeSmidt. 6 MR. GAMMAGE: Yes. I'm -- I'm representing 7 myself. 8 THE COURT: You're not representing yourself 9 yet. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: What the fuck you mean I'm not? 11 THE COURT: We talked about your language 12 yesterday. 13 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. 14 THE COURT: And how you can't swear in the 15 courtroom. 16 MR. GAMMAGE: Shut the fuck up. I'm not -- 17 I'm not doing no Rule 20, okay? And that's that. 18 THE COURT: Okay, well now, you for sure are. 19 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not. 20 THE COURT: I'm ordering -- 21 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not. 22 THE COURT: I'm ordering an -- 23 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not. 24 THE COURT: -- a Rule 20.01 -- 25 MR. GAMMAGE: Suck a dick. I'm not. ===== PAGE 005/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 5 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 THE COURT: Get out of my courtroom. 2 MR. GAMMAGE: Let's move forward. 3 THE COURT: You're -- we're done. 4 MR. GAMMAGE: Let's go. 5 THE COURT: Thank you. 6 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. I'm not. Okay? Eat ass 7 and keep moving. Here. 8 THE COURT: For the record, he just threw 9 something at me. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: Shut the fuck up. 11 THE COURT: Didn't hit me. 12 THE CLERK: Piece of paper. 13 THE COURT: Oh, it must be the petition. 14 MS. PEREZ: I was, like, oh, okay. 15 THE COURT: It was paper. It was the 16 petition. It's in a rubber band behind me. 17 MR. DeSMIDT: I have the original, Judge. 18 Mr. Isaacman gave it to me yesterday. 19 THE COURT: Thank you. 20 MR. ISAACMAN: That's the one that the 21 deputies gave him this -- yesterday morning -- 22 MR. DeSMIDT: Okay. 23 MR. ISAACMAN: At the Court's instruction. 24 THE COURT: Like, something just came whizzing 25 at my head. ===== PAGE 006/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 6 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 MR. DeSMIDT: Judge -- 2 THE COURT: Okay, so -- 3 MR. DeSMIDT: He had signed a petition to 4 proceed as pro se counsel. I understand the Court's 5 position. He can't do that if the Court's going to 6 order a Rule 20 at this point. 7 THE COURT: And understood. Let's get a 8 three-week date, and it won't take that them long 9 because he won't -- we'll see how it goes. 10 MR. ISAACMAN: Difficulty's going to be, 11 Judge, if he doesn't cooperate with them -- 12 THE COURT: I know. 13 MR. ISAACMAN: -- if he refuses. 14 THE COURT: Right. But -- yeah. 15 MR. ISAACMAN: So I don't know if it matters 16 -- this doesn't need to be on the record. I don't 17 think I need to be at that hearing. But maybe I do, 18 because if he's found competent or whatever, that we'd 19 proceed. I'm out of the office the week of July 31st 20 through August -- 21 THE DEPUTY: This didn't hit you, did it? 22 MR. ISAACMAN: -- 4th. 23 THE COURT: It didn't hit me. It went over my 24 head. It's back there. It's his petition. 25 MR. ISAACMAN: But whatever that week that ===== PAGE 007/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 7 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 bridges the last -- the end of July, beginning of 2 August, just so that the Court's aware. 3 THE COURT: Okay. 4 MR. ISAACMAN: Which I think would be three 5 weeks. 6 THE COURT: Okay, that's good know. 7 THE DEPUTY: He likes to throw things at the 8 judge. 9 THE COURT: I just heard something, I mean -- 10 MR. DeSMIDT: It didn't hit her though. 11 THE DEPUTY: Good. 12 THE COURT: Luckily. Okay -- 13 THE DEPUTY: Do you want this? 14 MR. DeSMIDT: Not really. Yeah, I suppose. 15 I'll put it in the file. Don't throw it at me. 16 THE COURT: Thanks. 17 THE DEPUTY: Didn't see that happening -- 18 THE COURT: I bet you didn't let him have 19 something very heavy, but -- microphones. 20 Okay, so what date do we have? 21 THE CLERK: So three weeks is August 1st for 22 the Rule 20 -- 23 THE COURT: Monday, okay. 24 THE CLERK: -- the Rule 20 calendar, and then 25 -- ===== PAGE 008/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 8 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 THE COURT: Oh, that's right. It goes on the 2 Rule 20 return calendar. So, yay. 3 THE CLERK: And then we could do, for 4 tracking, August 3rd at 11:30. 5 MR. ISAACMAN: Just matters if you want me to 6 be there or not. 7 MS. PEREZ: August 3rd works for me. 8 MR. ISAACMAN: I have -- 9 THE COURT: Are you off that week? 10 MR. ISAACMAN: That's the week I'm out. 11 THE COURT: Oh. 12 MR. DeSMIDT: I have a speedy in custody 13 homicide set to start on the 31st that is still on 14 track to -- to go forward. It could move because I 15 didn't want the speedy trial. If he does go away, I 16 was hoping to be -- I was supposed to be away that 17 week, but -- 18 THE COURT: Oh, okay. 19 MR. DeSMIDT: But it was the only date that we 20 had and he's been adamant that he wanted a speedy 21 trial, so -- 22 MR. ISAACMAN: Well, I'm out that week anyway, 23 so -- 24 THE COURT: That's fine. 25 MR. DeSMIDT: So could we do the following ===== PAGE 009/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 9 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 week, Judge? 2 THE COURT: Absolutely. 3 THE CLERK: So then that would be the 4 August 8th Rule 20, and then August -- 5 MR. ISAACMAN: Well, we could do the Rule 20 6 on August -- 7 THE COURT: Are you talking about August -- 8 THE CLERK: Or I could leave it -- 9 MR. ISAACMAN: Well, I may or may not be 10 there, so my -- so let's not set -- 11 MR. DeSMIDT: Yeah. That's a kind of case I 12 don't want to dump on Susan too, or somebody else. 13 THE CLERK: Okay. 14 THE COURT: So August 8th, and then -- 15 THE CLERK: And then August 10th or 11th? 16 MR. DeSMIDT: So I'm standby counsel on a CSE 17 case that week in front of Judge Brandt, so if we just 18 want to try to figure out that's close to 9:00 or 19 1:30. Peter Ziak (phonetic spelling) is his name. 20 THE COURT: Oh. Zuek (phonetic spelling)? 21 MR. DeSMIDT: Yeah. 22 THE COURT: Brandt thinks she's keeping that 23 trial? 24 MR. DeSMIDT: Yeah, she said she was going to 25 try to keep it when she did the move. ===== PAGE 010/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 10 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 THE COURT: Hmm. Isn't it blocked to Janzen? 2 But anyway, okay. How about the the 11th? 3 How's that look for everybody? 4 MS. PEREZ: Wide open. 5 MR. DeSMIDT: What time on the 11th? 6 THE CLERK: 9:00? 7 THE COURT: Whatever you want. 8 MR. DeSMIDT: 9:00? 9 MS. PEREZ: You said 9:00 was good? 10 MR. DeSMIDT: That works great for me. That 11 work for everyone else? 12 MR. ISAACMAN: I'll make it work. 13 MS. PEREZ: I'll make it work. 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MS. PEREZ: Thank you. 16 MR. DeSMIDT: Thanks, Judge. 17 THE COURT: All right, thank you. We're off 18 the record. 19 (WHEREUPON, the proceedings were concluded at 9:19 a.m.) 20 21 22 23 24 25 ===== PAGE 011/011 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 11 7/20/2023 State of Minnesota 1:42 PM 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA 2 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 3 4 COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 5 6 I, Erin R. Watson, an Official Court Reporter in 7 and for the Fourth Judicial District of the State of 8 Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have transcribed 9 the foregoing transcript from a CourtSmart audio 10 recording, and that the foregoing pages constitute a 11 true and correct transcript of the proceedings taken 12 in connection with the above-entitled matter. 13 14 15 Dated and signed July 20, 2023. 16 17 /s/Erin R. Watson 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-21-8412_Transcript_2023-07-21_20240430081738.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-21-8412 defendant: Stephone Ahmad Gammage filing_type: Transcript filing_date: 2023-07-21 pages: 035 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 1 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT 2 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ) 4 State of Minnesota, ) Transcript of Proceedings ) 5 Plaintiff, ) Court File Number: vs. ) 27-CR-21-8412 6 Stephone Ahmad Gammage, ) 7 ) Defendant. ) 8 ) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9 10 The above-entitled matter came before the 11 Honorable Kerry W. Meyer, Judge of District Court, at the 12 Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis, 13 Minnesota on July 10th, 2023 at 11:52 a.m. 14 15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 16 A P P E A R A N C E S 17 Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, appeared on behalf of the State of Minnesota. 18 19 David DeSmidt, Assistant Hennepin County Public Defender, appeared on behalf of the Defendant, Stephon Ahmad 20 Gammage. 21 22 23 Transcribed by: 24 Erin R. Watson Official Court Reporter 25 Minneapolis, Minnesota ===== PAGE 002/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 2 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 THE COURT: Okay, we're on the record, State 3 of Minnesota vs. Stephone Gammage, Court File 4 27-CR-21-8412. Counsel, please note your appearances. 5 MS. PEREZ: Good morning, Your Honor; 6 Jacqueline Perez, that's P-E-R-E-Z, Assistant County 7 Attorney, on behalf of the State. 8 MR. DeSMIDT: And may it please the Court, 9 David DeSmidt, D-E-S-M-I-D-T. I'm appearing on behalf 10 of and with Mr. Gammage, who is sitting next to me at 11 counsel table. 12 THE COURT: All right. We're scheduled for 13 trial this week, and there is a speedy demand. How 14 are we proceeding? 15 MR. DeSMIDT: Judge, I met with Mr. Gammage 16 last Friday morning to discuss a plea offer that had 17 been submitted to me that day or the day before by 18 Ms. Perez. In the prior -- during the course of 19 discussing that, Mr. Gammage indicated to me that, you 20 know, there were some things that he wanted -- some 21 pieces of evidence that he wanted disclosed. And I 22 did some additional checking. Those items do not 23 exist, or at least they haven't been provided, and I 24 don't believe that they're available. 25 But in any event, I met with -- Mr. Gammage ===== PAGE 003/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 3 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 told me last Friday that he didn't intend to come to 2 court today. He told me he did not request a speedy 3 trial, doesn't want a speedy trial. This morning he 4 indicated to me that he wants -- I think he wants to 5 fire me. I'm not sure. But he indicated to me he 6 wanted to address the Court directly. 7 THE COURT: Okay. So, I guess we should start 8 with that piece, because that will affect when your 9 trial will be. 10 So, Mr. Gammage, Mr. DeSmidt's your attorney, 11 right? 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Right. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, he's a -- a appointed -- 15 THE COURT: Yep. 16 MR. GAMMAGE: Whatever you call -- whatever 17 you call it. He's not an attorney, but -- 18 THE COURT: Oh, yeah, he's an attorney. He's 19 got more trial experience than probably any other 20 defense attorney in town. So he is a -- he is a 21 defense attorney; he's a licensed attorney. He had 22 been pointed to you through the Public Defender's 23 Office, right? That's what you mean? 24 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah, he's a public defender. 25 Yeah. ===== PAGE 004/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 4 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: Yeah, but he's still an attorney. 2 Okay, so are you ready to start trial this week, 3 Mr. Gammage? 4 MR. GAMMAGE: No, we're not. 5 THE COURT: Okay. And so you want more time 6 to get ready for trial? 7 MR. GAMMAGE: Yes. Well, this is on the 8 record, right? 9 THE COURT: Yes, we're on the record. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. And so -- 11 THE COURT: The court reporter isn't in the 12 room, but the -- 13 MR. GAMMAGE: That's fine. 14 THE COURT: -- blue light -- 15 MR. GAMMAGE: I really don't -- 16 THE COURT: It's okay. They're -- it is. You 17 -- we are on the record. 18 MR. GAMMAGE: All right. This happened in 19 2021. 20 THE COURT: Yes. 21 MR. GAMMAGE: I had a lawyer, Xavier Martinez 22 [sic]. I requested that the straight counts be 23 provided and my personal 911 call be provided. 24 They're telling me that my 911 call was not recorded 25 or available. I call false witness on that. ===== PAGE 005/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 5 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 There would be no way that, you know, I ran 2 this bicyclist over and called 911. None of my 3 belongings or none of my sayings have been provided or 4 even looked at or even sought after. This has been 5 since 2021. We're in '23 now. 6 THE COURT: Right. 7 MR. GAMMAGE: I can -- I can vividly see, you 8 know, the cars turning, the lights flashing; you know 9 what I mean? 10 THE COURT: Yes. 11 MR. GAMMAGE: The car shot straight across or 12 turned. Either one, I was delivering pizzas. The 13 bicyclist clearly got ranned [sic] over. I 14 immediately called 911. There's a bicyclist, they got 15 ranned over by this park right here, signal all 16 dispatch. He got drug by the car a mile up the road; 17 you know what I mean? 18 I just moved out here from Phoenix. I don't 19 have a place to stay; I'm sleeping in my car right 20 now. 21 THE COURT: You mean right now or you mean 22 back in '21? 23 MR. GAMMAGE: No, back then. 24 THE COURT: Okay. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm telling this -- ===== PAGE 006/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 6 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: We're still doing the '21 -- 2 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm telling -- 3 THE COURT: We're still doing the 911 call. 4 Okay. 5 MR. GAMMAGE: Right. I'm -- this is all going 6 to be on the 911 call. 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm telling them this -- all 9 this. The police officer, he comes to -- he comes to 10 my job, and he's like, "You ran over this bicyclist." 11 He started reading rights. 12 I'm like, "No, I called 911." 13 He's like, "I understand that," this, that, 14 and that, whatever the case may be, okay? 15 I want my 911 call, okay? I even told my 16 insurance that, you know, they're going to be 17 contacted. So I'll also get, you know, my 911 call, 18 and I'll also get the street cam. Because it's -- 19 it's by a park. 20 THE COURT: Okay. 21 MR. GAMMAGE: You know? 22 THE COURT: So have you ever heard the 911 23 call since you made it? 24 MR. GAMMAGE: No. 25 THE COURT: Okay. ===== PAGE 007/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 7 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: They haven't -- they have -- 2 they told me my 911 call -- 3 THE COURT: Yeah. 4 MR. GAMMAGE: -- that where the lady said, 5 "Everything's dispatched." 6 THE COURT: Yeah. 7 MR. GAMMAGE: "You can go back to work. If we 8 need anything --." 9 THE COURT: Okay. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: Because I told her, I -- I was 11 actively delivering a pizza. I had two pizzas that I 12 needed to deliver. 13 THE COURT: Yep. 14 MR. GAMMAGE: She told me, "Everything's been 15 active. We got your information. You can go back to 16 work. If we need anything, we'll come to your job." 17 THE COURT: Okay. 18 MR. GAMMAGE: They come to my job about, like, 19 9:00 -- like, 9:30, whatever the case may be -- 20 THE COURT: Okay. So the same day? 21 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah, the same -- literally, 22 like -- 23 THE COURT: Yeah. 24 MR. GAMMAGE: -- same day. 25 THE COURT: Okay. But you've never heard the ===== PAGE 008/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 8 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 911 call, right? 2 MR. GAMMAGE: It's never been provided. 3 THE COURT: Okay, that's what I'm checking. 4 So -- 5 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah. 6 THE COURT: Mr. DeSmidt, you'd tried to get 7 it? You've asked for it? 8 MR. DeSMIDT: Yes, Judge. The only 911 call 9 that's been disclosed is a 911 call of -- of the 10 citizen witness who was -- who placed a call, 11 according to the recording and according to the 12 transcript, almost simultaneously with observing or 13 witnessing what they claim happened. 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MR. DeSMIDT: Having explained that to 16 Mr. Gammage, I have not been able to locate another 17 911 call. There are -- I have advised him there are 18 some still photos of the street. There's some still 19 photos of his car and some damage to his car. 20 But I have not received and I do not believe 21 there are any traffic cameras or surveillance videos. 22 And I've indicated to him those would have had to have 23 been requested either by law enforcement or his 24 attorney, and he told me he believed Mr. Martine did, 25 in fact, request it. But I don't -- I don't see any ===== PAGE 009/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 9 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 record of that. 2 I've explained to Mr. Gammage, if those things 3 aren't requested within a very short order period of 4 time, they run 'em again -- they run them over again, 5 and they re-record over them. 6 MR. GAMMAGE: And to piggyback up on him -- 7 not to cut him off. Those pictures, when the cop 8 came, he took a pictures -- he took pictures of my 9 vehicle. My vehicle was brand new. 10 THE COURT: Okay. So I don't want to get too 11 far in the facts of the case, okay? 12 MR. GAMMAGE: No, I'm just -- I'm just letting 13 you know that -- 14 THE COURT: Yep. 15 MR. GAMMAGE: -- you know, to bring this up, 16 because you -- we need to speak in, you know, 17 conversational pieces. 18 THE COURT: Okay. 19 MR. GAMMAGE: So now that he talked about the 20 pictures, when the police officer came, he took 21 pictures of my car to document his paperwork. 22 THE COURT: Okay, and I'm not going to cross 23 examine you, so just wait. 24 Ms. Perez, do you know anything? What -- 25 what's happened with the 911 call? ===== PAGE 010/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 10 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MS. PEREZ: Your Honor, this is a -- this is 2 the first time that I'm hearing about whether -- 3 allegations that Mr. Gammage made a 911 call. I have 4 reviewed this case extensively in preparation for 5 trial. I don't see in the reports, in the CAD 6 reports, or anything in the 911 report that we get 7 that another call was made besides the citizen 911 8 call that was disclosed. 9 There was some conversation, or at least with 10 the investigator, about trying to get surveillance 11 footage based on the trial prep, which I also did 12 disclose to defense counsel. He was not able to get 13 any, so the State doesn't have any surveillance to 14 disclose. 15 THE COURT: Okay. But you can make a call in 16 case the -- in case the 911 calls got separated, 17 which, of course, we know they shouldn't be. But in 18 case they got separated, you'd be able to call 9-- the 19 dispatch today to find out if there's a second? 20 MS. PEREZ: Absolutely. I have a meeting with 21 her today. I can definitely ask her about that. 22 THE COURT: Okay, thank you. 23 Okay, so -- so she'll find -- if there's a 24 second call that came through that got recorded at 25 all-- ===== PAGE 011/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 11 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, I was the first one to 2 make the call. 3 THE COURT: Okay, well-- 4 MR. GAMMAGE: I -- I was. I have no reason to 5 lie. 6 THE COURT: Okay, I -- 7 MR. GAMMAGE: No, I'm just letting you know, 8 you know? You know, I didn't ran somebody over and 9 then I called 911, you know? It makes no sense. So 10 if she really want to check, you know, for my name. 11 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Because my name's in the police 13 report that, you know, says "Stephone Gammage ran 14 over," you know? How would they know my name, you 15 know? My license plate's from Arizona, you know? 16 When you type it in, you know, you have to -- 17 THE COURT: Do you remember the -- the phone 18 number you used that day? 19 MR. GAMMAGE: 911. 20 THE COURT: No, no, that you called from? 21 Because they could track it through your cell phone 22 number. 23 MR. GAMMAGE: Uh -- 24 THE COURT: I know it's been a while. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: You can try a -- ===== PAGE 012/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 12 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. DeSMIDT: I can assist, Judge. 2 THE COURT: Okay. 3 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, I -- 4 MR. DeSMIDT: Mr. Gammage -- 5 MR. GAMMAGE: I got -- I have more numbers 6 than -- 7 MR. DeSMIDT: Mr. Gammage -- 8 MR. GAMMAGE: It might be 602-- I know it's 9 either a 602 number, because I remember the dispatch 10 asking me. This is a 602 number or a 480 number. 11 It's either a 602 or 480. The dispatched asked me, 12 "This is a 602 Arizona number, pretty much. Are 13 you--?" 14 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. 15 MR. GAMMAGE: "-- are you in Minnesota?" I 16 was, like, "Yes, I'm in Minnesota. I seen this 17 bicyclist get hit." I pulled over by this park. I 18 could read the park name. It's like -- almost like 19 Bora Bora, Minnetonka -- whatever the name of the park 20 is. 21 THE COURT: Okay. 22 MR. GAMMAGE: And I told her exactly what I 23 see. I work; I don't have an apartment, nor address. 24 I sleep in my vehicle. 25 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. ===== PAGE 013/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 13 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: I told her I work at Toppers 2 Pizza, and if they need any other further questions, 3 there was a car that followed the vehicle that smashed 4 into the -- into the bicyclist. And that bicyclist 5 was nowhere to be found. When I seen him get hit, he 6 dislodged into the -- into the windshield and got drug 7 up about by where I -- you know, by where the sign of 8 the park was. So the park -- the traffic was flowing 9 this way -- 10 THE COURT: Okay, okay. Again, I -- 11 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm just letting you know. 12 THE COURT: I know you are. And I'm just 13 saying, we are on the record, and so if you choose to 14 testify at your trial, we want to make sure you 15 haven't made a statement different before. So -- 16 MR. GAMMAGE: I know. I -- I've never gaven 17 [sic] a statement. 18 THE COURT: No, no, no, I know, and you don't 19 have to, okay? 20 MR. GAMMAGE: All right. 21 THE COURT: That I'm just -- 22 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm just letting you know -- 23 THE COURT: Yeah. 24 MR. GAMMAGE: -- like, so -- 25 THE COURT: Yeah. ===== PAGE 014/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 14 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm facing -- I don't know the 2 direction, whatever it is. 3 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. 4 MR. GAMMAGE: But on my right-hand side is the 5 park. 6 THE COURT: Okay. 7 MR. GAMMAGE: The bicyclist, he comes on my 8 right-hand side. We were all going this way. The 9 turn signals -- so this car, he's turning this way, 10 and this car, he either screeching out -- he either 11 comes where this deputy's at, straight forward. 12 Because I vividly see these cars are turning, and then 13 everything stops, and then you hear peeling out. 14 And then the bicyclist, he takes probably, 15 like, two or three -- like, pumped, and that car 16 speeds off. He launches onto -- he smashes into the 17 front windshield, so now he's coming back this way. 18 The bicyclist is going this way. So he gets hit -- 19 THE COURT: Yeah. 20 MR. GAMMAGE: -- and slams into, like, the 21 windshield of his vehicle and gets drug up to -- so I 22 turned that way, to the right side. And, you know, I 23 try to look at the street lights to see where I'm at. 24 I just know if I tell dispatch where this park is, you 25 know, she's going to get the full -- ===== PAGE 015/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 15 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: Yep. 2 THE WITNESS: -- the gist of it. The vehicle 3 was headed -- which would be, I said westbound, you 4 know. Whatever the case may be. She said -- 5 THE COURT: So you -- 6 MR. GAMMAGE: "Everything's dispatched. Your 7 -- your file's been noted. If we need anything, we'll 8 contact you." 9 So I'm in jail. Like, this is the way that 10 they're contacting me that the, you know, bicyclist 11 was at least killed or murdered or something. This 12 has been since 2021, and we're at '23. 13 THE COURT: Right. And you're scheduled for 14 trial today, and what I'm trying to figure out is 15 whether we're -- whether you're starting trial today 16 or whether we need a little more time and who your 17 attorney's going to be, okay? 18 MR. GAMMAGE: Right. Look, me personally -- 19 THE COURT: Yes. 20 MR. GAMMAGE: -- we need more time. Because if 21 -- if you're saying I -- you're saying I hit the 22 vehicle, you know -- 23 THE COURT: I'm not saying that. That's what 24 the charge says. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, not -- not you. That's ===== PAGE 016/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 16 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 what the charge says. 2 THE COURT: Yeah, that's what the charge says. 3 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. So now my -- my 4 insurance, you know -- my insurance, this -- this 5 person, you know, will want to have some kind of 6 light, okay? So my insurance will want to get 7 involved and will be a part of this case, as also -- 8 as well. 9 THE COURT: Just so you know, that doesn't 10 happen in criminal court. Insurance is never talked 11 about, so -- 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Well -- well, my insurance never 13 contacted me -- 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MR. GAMMAGE: -- to even say I've been in a 16 wrecked [sic] or anything like that. 17 THE COURT: Okay, separate issue. 18 MR. GAMMAGE: You know, so he wants, you know, 19 that for my, you know, here on the two dollar bill, 20 this, that, and that. So with insurance, you know, 21 you go to the hospital, you're pretty beat up. You 22 want all that stuff taken care of and paid. This 23 isn't your immigration case or anything like that, you 24 know? 25 So my insurance has not contacted me, so I'm ===== PAGE 017/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 17 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 just sitting in here, which is fine. You know, we eat 2 Salisbury steaks, tacos and all that. It's -- it's 3 amazing, you know. 4 THE COURT: Yeah, but you've been in custody 5 since last October, right? 6 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah, I have been. 7 THE COURT: So it'd be nice to get this case 8 going to trial. 9 MR. GAMMAGE: Which is -- which is fine, but 10 nothing that I've asked for, you know -- 11 THE COURT: Yeah. 12 MR. GAMMAGE: -- gets taken care of. I 13 understand, you know, people are making, you know, 14 five, six, ten bucks, twenty bucks an hour, you know. 15 I understand that, you know? Whatever the case may be 16 is living -- you know, as long as my end's not being 17 met, I stay in here for however long I want. It 18 doesn't -- I'm not wearing the energy or the mindset 19 that I ran somebody over; you understand? 20 Now, if I was like "Aw, man, I really did it. 21 I got to fight this," you know, then I would care, you 22 know. What are they offering? 23 THE COURT: Yeah. 24 MR. GAMMAGE: I'll take a full seven, okay? 25 I'll take the full seven years -- ===== PAGE 018/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 18 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: Yeah. 2 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? 3 THE COURT: So -- 4 MR. GAMMAGE: But I'm not -- I didn't do 5 anything. I made a 9-- 6 THE COURT: Yeah. 7 MR. GAMMAGE: Pull my 911 call up. 8 THE COURT: Okay, so -- 9 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? 10 THE COURT: Ms. Perez is going to try to find 11 that today, the 911 call, right? 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah. 13 THE COURT: The recording of it? 14 MR. GAMMAGE: Yep. 15 THE COURT: Have you and Mr. DeSmidt talked 16 about whether you want a jury trial or a judge trial, 17 or how you want to proceed to trial? 18 MR. GAMMAGE: I want the most money. It's 19 been since 2021. So we want people to come, we want 20 them sitting over there. I want to be able to look at 21 them -- 22 THE COURT: Okay. 23 MR. GAMMAGE: -- and smile. 24 THE COURT: Great. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: I have money, you know? ===== PAGE 019/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 19 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: Right. 2 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm the very first man on this 3 planet, and I can tell you that I talk about these 4 things. 5 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. 6 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? So it may be your first 7 time seeing me -- 8 THE COURT: Yep. 9 MR. GAMMAGE: -- but I'm not a robot. I can 10 create robots, you know? 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 MR. GAMMAGE: But there's no army. You know, 13 those are my flags I hand-stitched. You know, I 14 haven't talkedd about those things. 15 THE COURT: Okay. 16 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? I drop atomic bombs. 17 That's me, okay? Not a white man, you know. 18 Cambodian, that's what I am. Mr. Moscow is Cambodian. 19 THE COURT: Okay. 20 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? I'm Solomon. We live in 21 Antarctica. Most people don't know that. The way I 22 watchin' people, we live Antarctica, okay? On a 23 spiritual conversation, we've been talking about those 24 things. 25 THE COURT: Okay. ===== PAGE 020/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 20 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? Those buildings out 2 there, I -- don't nobody touch my work. These 3 computers, I do it. 4 THE COURT: Okay. 5 MR. GAMMAGE: You come behind. So wherever 6 the foal (phonetic spelling) is, okay, I'm in the 7 record book, okay? I put on, okay? 8 THE COURT: Okay. So I -- I need you to focus 9 just on your trial. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: I am. This is part of my trial. 11 THE COURT: No -- 12 MR. GAMMAGE: I want you to know who I am. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? 15 THE COURT: But I'm not going to be doing your 16 trial. I'm -- 17 MR. GAMMAGE: That's -- that's fine. 18 THE COURT: I'm just -- just so you know. 19 MR. GAMMAGE: I just want you to know, you 20 know? I'm answering, you know, the roof of your head, 21 blew my cover, you know? If the 1920s is off, blew my 22 cover, Chef Boyardee. You know? 23 THE COURT: Okay. So -- 24 MR. GAMMAGE: And it is -- it's just not 25 comfortable that, you know, my spirit acts for Colonel ===== PAGE 021/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 21 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 Sanders here, you know, prior to these things. 2 Whatever the case may be, he needs to be alleviated. 3 You know, when I do some asking and he shows up, you 4 know, you're in my bobcat. 5 You lived with King Tut. It's me, okay? And 6 then you just were at this Minnesota dog pound, okay? 7 I know those things. 8 THE COURT: So are you able -- you've -- 9 you've talked to Mr. DeSmidt about the discovery that 10 you're trying to find. 11 MR. GAMMAGE: And they -- they haven't 12 provided 'em anything. 13 THE COURT: Right. Nope, I understand that. 14 MR. GAMMAGE: So that -- I mean, I like fat 15 people, so if you want to keep getting paid and, you 16 know, she's different. You know, you're new, right? 17 THE COURT: Mr. -- 18 MR. GAMMAGE: No, I'm asking. You're new to 19 this case, right? 20 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 21 MR. GAMMAGE: So let's get her pockets full. 22 I seen you before, last time. I had Martinez [sic] 23 and he would stature this, that, and that. 24 THE COURT: Yep. Yep. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: There was another Chinese guy ===== PAGE 022/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 22 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 here. So let's get you -- let's get you good, fat. 2 You know? I -- hey, I don't -- I don't mind, you 3 know? 4 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage? 5 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm in -- I'm in a cell. 6 Somebody -- 7 THE COURT: Now, it's trial week. 8 MR. GAMMAGE: I understand. Somebody's 9 putting -- let's find out who's putting money on my 10 books. I have not asked my -- you know, my -- my 11 guardians to put any kind of money on my books. 12 THE COURT: Okay. 13 MR. GAMMAGE: So, you know, the State has my 14 checkbook. People, you know, I'm eating, passing gas, 15 you know? Commissary looking good, you know? I 16 really don't care. I'm a -- if I go to prison, it's 17 going to be the same thing, you know, however the case 18 may be. If she's new, you know, let her get her feet 19 wet -- 20 THE COURT: She's ready. I -- Ms. Perez, 21 you're ready for trial? 22 MS. PEREZ: That's correct, Your Honor. 23 THE COURT: That was my impression, since 24 you've met with your witnesses. 25 MR. GAMMAGE: That's fine, you know? ===== PAGE 023/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 23 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 THE COURT: Okay. So you're ready for trial, 2 Mr. Gammage? 3 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm just letting you know that I 4 -- I made a 911 call. I at least want to hear my 911 5 call, you know? Before I ask, you know, I'm going to 6 cut my hair again. You know, that you say when you -- 7 you know, I get the fade; looks pretty good, huh? 8 Yeah -- 9 THE COURT: So -- 10 MR. GAMMAGE: However, it's a waste of my 11 time. I -- I got to put in, you know, where I can get 12 paid just for being around. Hell, whatever kind of 13 paperwork. I haven't been in the courts since they 14 had to change the wood out, back -- this is like, 15 early Calvary days, you know? Maybe I 16 [indiscernible]. You know, you've seen the movies. I 17 guess it -- 18 THE COURT: So, Ms. Perez will find out if 19 there's a second 911 call, and -- 20 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, you want to get my actual 21 call. 22 THE COURT: That's the one I'm talking about. 23 MR. GAMMAGE: Yeah. Or you really want to 24 listen to all of them? I'm pretty sure the whole 25 intersection was right there. I mean, people took off ===== PAGE 024/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 24 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 after this guy. Now, however the case may be, you 2 know, it lays on the table, you know, however long it 3 takes. Minnesota's been broke, you know -- however, 4 you know, all these last names. They did -- next 5 133 years, they will not have those last names. I 6 understand that. 7 So we're in a state where we need a last name. 8 I've had my last name since birth; I'm Moses. I part 9 all that. You guys just watched me do that. Any-- 10 anywho, I told the water to get up off of each other. 11 So this is kind of like that, you know? I'm going to 12 come here, say what I need to -- I'm not wearing this 13 incident, that I was even a part of it. 14 I made a 911 call. And this is on the record, 15 so, whatever the case may be, whatever y'all want to 16 do is what y'all want to do, you know, the five 17 months. I'm not taking a federal -- you know, this is 18 not even a federal hold or any of that, you know? 19 However the case may be, I was re-watching, 20 you know, Naked and Afraid. This is kind of, like, 21 you know, for Brandon and all them. 22 THE COURT: Okay, it's time -- 23 MR. GAMMAGE: Those were -- they're at the zoo 24 right now. 25 THE COURT: It's time for you to stop talking. ===== PAGE 025/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 25 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. And I can do whatever you 2 want to do. 3 THE COURT: That -- right now I need you to 4 just -- 5 MR. GAMMAGE: I just need my criteria met -- 6 THE COURT: -- stop talking. 7 MR. GAMMAGE: If I can get my criteria met, we 8 can move forward. If not, then you got to throw it 9 out. 10 THE COURT: Okay, so, Mr. DeSmidt, had you 11 previously requested the 911 call? 12 MR. DeSMIDT: Yeah, in our standard request, 13 Judge. 14 THE COURT: Yeah, okay. 15 MR. DeSMIDT: You know, I mean -- 16 THE COURT: Yeah. 17 MR. DeSMIDT: -- we -- we request everything. 18 I -- as Ms. Perez has indicated, I did receive the -- 19 the CAD reports. I -- I didn't see any record of the 20 911 call in any of the reports, in any of the incident 21 detail reports. 22 MR. GAMMAGE: Excuse me. 23 MR. DeSMIDT: I listened to the scales 24 (phonetic) audio of the -- Mr. -- or when Mr. Gammage 25 talked to the investigator. There wasn't any ===== PAGE 026/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 26 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 indication at that time. I think there was some 2 conversation initially with one of the officers on 3 scene, but there was no -- if there's one that exists, 4 I'm happy to try and find it. And I believe Ms. Perez 5 and I can look. I -- I don't know that one exists. 6 I have explained to Mr. Gammage that if 7 traffic cams were not requested that they be saved, 8 either by law enforcement or Mr. Martinez or his 9 investigator, shortly after this incident, then they 10 no longer exist. And I know there were some -- again, 11 there were some still photos, but I think those were 12 taken by either the -- the officers or the witnesses. 13 THE COURT: And can I just ask, do those show 14 damage to his vehicle? 15 MR. DeSMIDT: There's one that arguably shows 16 damage to the front end of his vehicle, yes. 17 THE COURT: Okay, thank you. 18 MR. DeSMIDT: A couple of them. 19 THE COURT: Okay. 20 MR. DeSMIDT: Nothing major. 21 THE COURT: Okay. 22 MR. GAMMAGE: So I nicked him? 23 [indiscernible]. 24 THE COURT: Ms. Perez, anything to put on the 25 record further today? ===== PAGE 027/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 27 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MS. PEREZ: Just very -- very briefly, Your 2 Honor. This regards -- this is regarding scheduling. 3 Just so Your Honor knows, at the last hearing with 4 Judge Janzen at the OM, I did let her know when we 5 were scheduling this for trial that I was going to be 6 out of the office Thursday and Friday. Because this 7 was an in-custody speedy, she did schedule it for this 8 week. 9 The State is ready to start tomorrow if that's 10 the direction that we're going in. Just to let the 11 Court know that we would have to take a break for that 12 Thursday/Friday, and then I would absolutely have to 13 get in one witness this week, who is Officer Dalnes. 14 She is scheduled to leave the country on the 14th and 15 won't be back on the 20-- until the 27th. So if we go 16 this week, we would have to take a break 17 Thursday/Friday and resume on Monday. 18 THE COURT: But you need to get a jury and 19 call your witness -- 20 MS. PEREZ: That's correct. 21 THE COURT: -- Tuesday and Wednesday. 22 MS. PEREZ: That's correct. 23 THE COURT: Okay. Talk to your 911 operator 24 today, as scheduled, and let Mr. DeSmidt know any 25 update related to a second call. There is a speedy ===== PAGE 028/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 28 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 demand, it's still in place. I know that Mr. Gammage 2 has said different things about willingness to stay in 3 custody pre-trial. 4 MR. GAMMAGE: Who asked for a speedy trial 5 anyways? 6 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage, you were present when 7 the speedy trial was demanded. It was extended by six 8 days in order to get past the July 4 holiday. 9 MR. GAMMAGE: Oh, I -- I missed the last 10 couple of days. 11 MR. DeSMIDT: Actual-- actually, Judge, I -- 12 THE COURT: Was it May? 13 MR. DeSMIDT: I think he refused court -- 14 THE COURT: Okay. 15 MR. DeSMIDT: -- at the last hearing. I had 16 had lengthy conversations with him and -- and at the 17 time -- 18 MR. GAMMAGE: I missed three total. I missed 19 three total courts. 20 THE COURT: It's not your turn to talk. 21 MR. GAMMAGE: And I'm just letting you know. 22 MR. DeSMIDT: At that time, based on my 23 conversations with Mr. Gammage, I agreed with the -- 24 with the recommendation in the third or fourth 25 competency report that he was likely competent. He ===== PAGE 029/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 29 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 under-- he asks the right questions. 2 THE COURT: Mm-hmm. 3 MR. DeSMIDT: And at that time, I hadn't 4 listened -- I mean, we hadn't -- didn't have all this 5 extra conversation. But I don't think he was present. 6 He had told me that he wanted to talk to the judge and 7 he wanted his trial. He'd been in custody, you know, 8 like seven months at that point, or six months at that 9 point. He's coming up on, I think, eight or nine 10 months in custody now. 11 THE COURT: Right. 12 MR. DeSMIDT: On a presumptive 21-months 13 commit. And Ms. Perez has offered a -- a stay and 14 probation and credit time served. So, you know, it 15 was probably me that demanded a speedy trial because 16 of the age of the case and based on conversations I'd 17 had with Mr. Gammage about, at that time, him wanting 18 to get the case resolved. 19 He hadn't indicated to me at that point that 20 he wanted a 911 call. In fact, he didn't tell me that 21 until Friday morning. 22 THE COURT: Okay. So I'm reviewing the last 23 Rule 20.01 report, and it reads like what I'm seeing, 24 but concludes that he is competent. It -- it's clear 25 that Mr. Gammage knows the roles of everybody in the ===== PAGE 030/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 30 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 court. He wants a jury, so let's get him a jury. 2 I'll get you a judge to start tomorrow morning for 3 trial. We'll see how it goes. 4 MR. DeSMIDT: Mr. Gammage, do you want to have 5 me -- 6 MR. GAMMAGE: I want to represent myself. 7 MR. DeSMIDT: Do you want me to get you trial 8 clothes? 9 MR. GAMMAGE: No, no. This is -- this is 10 Louis Vuitton. This here was my old Louis Vuitton. 11 So we're going to stay in Louis Vuitton. I just 12 walked out of people's faces for these shoes. You 13 think I'm changing all that? No, I tore Minnesota 14 down. I just blew up the airport. You -- you don't 15 want to joke. 16 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage, usually people 17 choose -- 18 MR. GAMMAGE: However the case may be, I'll be 19 representing myself. I would like him dismissed from 20 my case. I have the right to do that. I would like 21 him dismissed from my case, and I'll do it my own 22 self, okay? 23 Now, further moving forward, my mother-fuckin' 24 call need to be pulled, okay? 25 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- ===== PAGE 031/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 31 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 MR. GAMMAGE: And my mother-fuckin' call needs 2 to be pulled. 3 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 4 MR. GAMMAGE: Simple, okay. I'm talking to 5 you like I'm the man of this mother-fuckin' house, 6 okay? My 911 call needs to be pulled, so as the 7 traffic cam. Ain't no this three years, two years for 8 it and the traffic cam lights ain't there. The 9 motherfucker went to the hospital -- 10 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage, you will stop 11 swearing -- 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay, okay. 13 THE COURT: -- in my courtroom. 14 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, get -- get -- get -- vivid 15 videos -- 16 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 17 MR. GAMMAGE: -- okay? And get it -- get it 18 down here, and then we can move forward. 19 THE COURT: Nope. 20 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? 21 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 22 MR. GAMMAGE: That's simple as that, okay? 23 That's how I'm going to approach it the next time. I 24 want the seven by disrespecting you, okay? They gave 25 jail, 40 years. You've seen all of me on -- on ===== PAGE 032/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 32 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 Facebook. 2 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage, the offer is -- 3 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. 4 THE COURT: -- not even to go to prison. 5 MR. GAMMAGE: I -- I give two rats -- okay, I 6 own PetSmart and Petco, okay? Are you smarter than a 7 rat? This is a rat race. You know, I'm Donald Trump, 8 okay? However the case may be, okay? 9 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 10 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not a fool. 11 THE COURT: -- in order to represent 12 yourself -- 13 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not a fool. 14 THE COURT: -- you need to -- 15 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm not a fool. I'm not a fool. 16 Your Rule 20 came from dogs. Okay? Your Rule 20 came 17 from the dog pound, and then, no, no. Okay? No, no, 18 we don't eat dog around here, okay? Nor do we eat 19 exotic animals, okay? No, no -- 20 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage, in order to -- 21 MR. GAMMAGE: We eat skyline -- we eats cot-- 22 we eats right from on down here. 23 THE COURT: Stop. Stop. In order to -- 24 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? We eat right on down 25 here. I'm not stopping, okay? This is the energy ===== PAGE 033/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 33 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 that I'm bringing. Okay? 2 THE COURT: In order to -- 3 MR. GAMMAGE: I have my only knock on wood. 4 THE COURT: In order to represent yourself -- 5 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay? I do what -- I do what 6 the fuck I want to do. I'm representing myself. 7 THE COURT: You need to complete -- 8 MR. GAMMAGE: I'm representing myself. 9 THE COURT: And I'm trying to let you do that. 10 MR. GAMMAGE: Well, do what you need to do -- 11 THE COURT: But you have to listen to me -- 12 MR. GAMMAGE: Bring a key (phonetic spelling). 13 Bring a key. What are y'all going to go do, okay? 14 THE COURT: In order to represent yourself, 15 that explains your rights. 16 MR. GAMMAGE: I got every right in the book. 17 THE COURT: We're getting you a copy. 18 MR. GAMMAGE: I got every right in the book, 19 okay? Everything that I requested in 2021. How do 20 you arrest me and I called 911? I'm going to call 911 21 on myself? 22 THE COURT: Mr. Gammage -- 23 MR. GAMMAGE: I -- 24 THE COURT: -- you'll go through this paperwork 25 and bring it back tomorrow when you come to court. ===== PAGE 034/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 34 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 You choose how you want to be dressed in front of the 2 jury. 3 MR. GAMMAGE: Okay. I get -- 4 THE COURT: You can be dressed in yellow, in 5 orange, or you can wear street clothes. 6 MR. GAMMAGE: That's how you know I'm God, 7 okay? 8 THE COURT: Mr. DeSmidt, are you going to have 9 a senior talk with him to go through this petition? 10 MR. DeSMIDT: I -- I will, Judge. 11 MR. GAMMAGE: No, you don't need to say 12 nothing else. I want him removed. 13 THE COURT: You can go -- 14 MR. GAMMAGE: What did I just say? 15 THE COURT: -- back with the deputies. 16 MR. GAMMAGE: What did I just say? 17 THE COURT: You can go back with the deputies. 18 MR. GAMMAGE: You need to be removed -- 19 THE CLERK: I'll get the paperwork in a 20 minute. 21 THE COURT: Thank you. 22 MR. GAMMAGE: Motherfucker need to be removed. 23 (WHEREUPON, the proceedings were concluded at 12:25 p.m.) 24 25 ===== PAGE 035/035 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court 35 7/21/2023 State of Minnesota 8:29 AM 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA 2 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 3 4 COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 5 6 I, Erin R. Watson, an Official Court Reporter in 7 and for the Fourth Judicial District of the State of 8 Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have transcribed 9 the foregoing transcript from a CourtSmart audio 10 recording, and that the foregoing pages constitute a 11 true and correct transcript of the proceedings taken 12 in connection with the above-entitled matter. 13 14 15 Dated and signed July 20, 2023. 16 17 /s/Erin R. Watson 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-21-8412_Witness List_2023-06-26_20240430081742.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-21-8412 defendant: Stephone Ahmad Gammage filing_type: Witness List filing_date: 2023-06-26 pages: 001 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/001 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 6/26/2023 12:47 PM STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT State of Minnesota, STATE'S AMENDED LIST OF Plaintiff', POTENTIAL WITNESSES vs. Court Case N0. 27-CR-2 1 -8412 CA. Case N0. 2 1A0441 3 Stephone Ahmad Gammage, Defendant. Jerome Carey Minneapolis Police Department Officer Melissa Dalnes Minneapolis Police Department Sergeant Bryce Robinson Minneapolis Police Department Rachel Zempel Minneapolis 91 l Carlos Ruben Angel Piones Minneapolis, MN Cody Lee Brugman Minneapolis, MN Cathy Walker Bloomington, MN Doctor Michael Fitzgerald M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital Respectfully submitted, MARY F. MORIARTY Hennepin County Attorney Jun 26, 2023 NW Jacqueline Perez (#0401049) Assistant County Attorney C2100 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Telephone: (612) 596-6615 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-21-8412_Witness List_2023-07-10_20240430081741.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-21-8412 defendant: Stephone Ahmad Gammage filing_type: Witness List filing_date: 2023-07-10 pages: 001 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/001 ===== 27-CR-21-8412 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/10/2023 4:44 PM STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT State of Minnesota, STATE'S AMENDED LIST OF Plaintiff, POTENTIAL WITNESSES vs. Court Case N0. 27-CR-21-8412 C.A. Case N0. 21A04413 Stephone Ahmad Gammage, Defendant. Jerome Carey Minneapolis Police Department Officer Melissa Dalnes Minneapolis Police Department Sergeant Bryce Robinson Minneapolis Police Department Rachel Zempel Minneapolis 91 l Carlos Ruben Angel Piones Minneapolis, MN Cody Lee Brugman Minneapolis, MN Amanda Schuna Cathy Walker Bloomington, MN Doctor Michael Fitzgerald EPPA c/o Jane Winters - Respectfully submitted, MARY F. MORIARTY Hennepin County Attorney Jul 10, 2023 We Jacqueline Perez (#0401049) Assistant County Attorney C2100 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 Telephone: (612) 596-6615 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-23-1886_Finding of Incompetency and Order_2023-07-13_20240430072356.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-23-1886 defendant: MATTHEW DAVID GUERTIN filing_type: Finding of Incompetency and Order filing_date: 2023-07-13 pages: 007 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN PROBATE/MENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Court File No. 27-CR-23-1886 State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, FINDINGS OF FACT, v. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER REGARDING Matthew David Guertin, COMPETENCY TO PROCEED Defendant. The above-entitled matter came before the district court, on July 7, 2023, for an evidentiary hearing regarding the Defendant’s competency. The hearing took place in person in Courtroom 456 at the Hennepin County Government Center. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, appeared for the State. The Defendant appeared along with his attorney, Bruce Rivers, Esq. Jill E. Rogstad, Ph.D., LP, ABPP (Forensic), Senior Clinical Forensic Psychologist at the Fourth Judicial District Court, testified at the hearing and the court received into evidence her Curriculum Vitae (Exhibit 2), and her Forensic Evaluation Report dated March 10, 2023 (Exhibit 3). The court also received into evidence a copy of United States Patent No. 11,577,177 B2 dated February 14, 2023 (Exhibit 1), as well as testimony from the Defendant. The matter was referred for hearing to the undersigned district court referee, who after considering the evidence, the arguments presented, and all the files and records herein, reports to the court making the following recommended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order: 1. Defendant is currently INCOMPETENT to proceed. FINDINGS OF FACT The Defendant, Matthew David Guertin, is charged in MNCIS file 27-CR-23-1886 with Dangerous Weapons-Reckless Discharge of Firearm Within a Municipality (Felony), Firearm- 1 ===== PAGE 002/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM Serial Number-Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), Firearm-Serial Number- Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), and Firearm-Serial Number-Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), from an incident alleged to have occurred on January 21, 2023. On January 25, 2023, the Honorable Lyonel Norris, Referee of District Court, found probable cause to believe that the offenses were committed and that Defendant committed them. He then ordered that a Rule 20.01 evaluation be completed. Jill E. Rogstad, Ph.D., LP, ABPP (Forensic), was assigned to complete the evaluation of the Defendant. She filed her report on March 10, 2023, opining that Mr. Guertin is incompetent and provided the following diagnoses: Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder (primary). Mr. Guertin challenges Dr. Rogstad’s conclusion, taking the position that he is competent to proceed in his criminal matters. Mr. Guertin testified that he is currently employed as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a start-up company. His company is listed as the assignee on United States Patent No. 11,577,177 B2, and he, as an individual, is listed as the inventor and the applicant. Ex. 1. Mr. Guertin testified that he understands his charges, noting that reckless discharge of a firearm in a municipality is a felony with a maximum of a two-year sentence. He notes that he and his attorney have discussed possible defenses; that he understands the information relayed to him by his attorney; and that there is nothing impeding their relationship. In fact, Mr. Guertin and his attorney, Mr. Rivers, have had a professional relationship for many years. Mr. Guertin also admitted to having been through criminal proceedings in the past. While he acknowledged that he may not understand all the technicalities of criminal proceedings, he indicates that he would ask his attorney if he had questions about the proceedings. Mr. Guertin appeared well-dressed, noting that he wore a tie to court “to be presentable.” He presents as intelligent and passionate about his work with technology, including his patent. However, much of his testimony was focused on his 2 ===== PAGE 003/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM technological work and patent, and he required frequent redirection to stay on point. In fact, there were times during his testimony that Mr. Guertin became lost in his answer to a question because of rambling statements about his patent or other unrelated topics. For instance, when discussing the events that led to what he describes as the “most cordial standoff ever” [with the police], Mr. Guertin began discussing his actions in firing his gun in order to attract the police. He did so instead of calling 911 because he could not trust his electronic devices due to his suspicions involving Netflix and Microsoft and protection of his patent. The court appreciates Mr. Guertin’s testimony and his participation in the hearing; however, the court has serious concerns regard Mr. Guertin’s ability to meaningfully participate in criminal proceedings and understand the process, given his perseveration regarding his patent, and his delusional beliefs about others. Dr. Rogstad opines that Mr. Guertin is not competent to proceed in his criminal matters, concluding in her report “…that Mr. Guertin’s symptoms presently compromise his capacity to understand rationally the proceedings, participate in the defense, and consult rationally with counsel.” Ex. 3, p. 9. Dr. Rogstad offers a diagnosis of Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder (primary). While Dr. Rogstad testified that this is a legitimate diagnosis, she indicated that additional information would be needed to provide more specificity. Dr. Rogstad notes that Mr. Guertin “…displays prominent delusional beliefs that include persecutory and referential themes,” the content and intensity of which “…are highly consistent with phenomenology of the persecutory delusions that can accompany psychotic disorders.” Id. at 7. She further indicates that Mr. Guertin may also suffer from a mood-related disorder, namely mania or hypomania, given “…his frequent digressions and tendency to become distracted by his own thoughts,” which “…were consistent with flight of ideas.” Id. at 8. She also notes that Mr. Guertin was “highly distractible” during the examination, making it “…difficult to extract meaningful, 3 ===== PAGE 004/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM coherent information from him.” Id. The court observed identical behavior during his testimony on July 7, 2023, to that exhibited during his examination. Dr. Rogstad testified that misuse 1 of Adderall could account for some of Mr. Guertin’s symptoms, but acknowledged that she was not a toxicologist or medical doctor and that she did not know how much Adderall Mr. Guertin actually took. Despite reporting this possibility, Dr. Rogstad opines Mr. Guertin is not competent. As a result of his symptoms, Dr. Rogstad believes that Mr. Guertin is unable to participate in the legal process regarding his criminal matters. She credibly testified that while Mr. Guertin has good factual knowledge, he is unable to apply this knowledge due to delusional beliefs. For example, when Mr. Guertin spoke about his delusional beliefs, he indicated he would present evidence supporting these beliefs. In her report, Dr. Rogstad states, “…while he knows the nature of his charges, Mr. Guertin’s delusional beliefs are inextricably linked to his perceptions of his current legal situation, and they obstruct his ability to apply this factual legal knowledge to discussions of his own case in a rational manner devoid of delusional reasoning.” Id. at 9. Specifically, Dr. Rogstad reports that his delusions impacted his perception of relevant evidence, that he supported the choices he made “…with impaired perceptions of objective reality,” and that ultimately, he was unable to participate in “consistently coherent” and “reality-based” discussions regarding the proceedings. Id. Her testimony supports these conclusions when she states that Mr. Guertin did not understand evidence or the ramifications of making decisions because of the delusions that emerged as they were discussing legal proceedings. Dr. Rogstad also testified that Mr. Guertin lacks insight into his mental health, as evidenced by his belief that he is under duress as opposed to having any impaired perceptions. Finally, Dr. Rogstad testified that neither her report nor her opinion changed after observing Mr. Guertin’s testimony during the July 7, 2023 hearing. 1 Mr. Guertin testified that he takes additional dosages of his Adderall medication on long days because the medication is “fast-acting.” He gave one example as working overnight at Coachella to finish an art piece for the next day. 4 ===== PAGE 005/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM The court finds that the greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is not competent to proceed at this time. He suffers from a mental illness with a diagnosis of Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder, as offered by Dr. Rogstad. This may also include a mood component, namely mania or hypomania. This mental illness prevents Mr. Guertin from rationally understanding the legal process and obstructs his ability to prepare a defense or rationally consult with his counsel. Dr. Rogstad persuasively reports that Mr. Guertin’s delusions impact his strategical decisions. For instance, he indicated that providing testimony at his trial would serve “…as a way to ‘have the opportunity to make all this stuff [about his perceived persecution] public in the courtroom,’” with similar thoughts regarding evidence he collected. Ex. 3, p. 9. Additionally, the court observed Mr. Guertin testify, during which his answers often wandered towards the themes of technology, patents, and competitors. While it is evident that Mr. Guertin is an intelligent, talented individual with a passion for technology, this does not necessarily make him competent to proceed in his criminal matters. He may understand the factual components of criminal proceedings, but it is evident to the court that he is unable to apply this factual knowledge in his defense. Based upon the totality of evidence before the court including Mr. Guertin’s testimony, Dr. Rogstad’s testimony, and the exhibits received into evidence, the court concludes that the greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is not currently competent to proceed and thus, the defense has not met their burden of proof. In summary, the court finds the testimony and report of Dr. Rogstad to be the most credible and persuasive evidence regarding Mr. Guertin’s competency to proceed. Dr. Rogstad has extensive experience conducting forensic evaluations, including having completed approximately 400 forensic evaluations. See also Ex. 2. Her report was thorough and considered several possible factors contributing to Mr. Guertin’s symptoms, as well as the significance of those symptoms. 5 ===== PAGE 006/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM The court also notes the similarity in Mr. Guertin’s presentation during both his evaluation and at the July 7, 2023 hearing: Mr. Guertin presented as verbose, with responses to questions that included excessive detail. He often brought his responses back to the themes of technology, patents, and competitors; and on occasion, had to ask that questions be repeated due to his extensive responses. Mr. Guertin appears to the court to be unable to separate matters involving his criminal charges from his delusional thoughts regarding his technology. It was evident that he continues to suffer from mental health concerns that impact his ability to fully understand and engage in the proceedings regarding his criminal matters. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW “A defendant has a due process right not to be tried or convicted of a criminal charge if he or she is legally incompetent.” Bonga v. State, 797 N.W.2d 712, 718 (Minn. 2011). Rule 20.01 of the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that if the court finds by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant is competent, it must enter an order finding the defendant competent to proceed. Minn. R. Crim. P. Rule 20.01, subd. 5(c). A defendant is incompetent and must not plead, be tried, or be sentenced if the defendant due to mental illness or cognitive impairment lacks ability to: (a) rationally consult with counsel; or (b) understand the proceedings or participate in the defense. Id., subd. 2. The determination of whether a defendant is able to rationally consult with the defense attorney or understand and participate in the proceedings turns on the facts of each particular case. Moreover, fact-finders, including district courts, are not required to accept an expert’s testimony or recommendations. State v. Roberts, 876 N.W.2d 863, 868 (Minn. 2016). Foremost, throughout the criminal proceedings the trial court must be mindful of its protective duty to ensure that a defendant is competent to proceed. See State v. 6 ===== PAGE 007/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM Bauer, 245 N.W.2d 848, 852 (Minn. 1976) (ruling that the court should have conducted further inquiry into the important matter of defendant’s competency). The greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is incompetent to proceed. ORDER Defendant, Matthew David Guertin, is currently INCOMPETENT to proceed. Order Recommended By: BY THE COURT: _______________________________ Referee of District Court Judge of District Court 7 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-23-1886_Order for Continuance_2023-06-14_20240430072357.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-23-1886 defendant: MATTHEW DAVID GUERTIN filing_type: Order for Continuance filing_date: 2023-06-14 pages: 001 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/001 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 6/14/2023 2:34 PM State of Minnesota District Court County of Hennepin Fourth Judicial District State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, ORDER CONTINUING v. HEARING Matthew David Guertin, Defendant. Court File No.: 27-CR-23-1886 The above-entitled matter was scheduled before Julia Dayton Klein, Judge of District Court, on June 14, 2023, for an evidentiary hearing upon the Defense’s objection to the competency opinion rendered by Dr. Rogstad, dated March 10, 2023. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, represents the State. Bruce Rivers represents Defendant. On June 13, 2023, Mr. Rivers requested a continuance in the matter due to scheduling conflicts. The State did not object. The parties agreed on the new date of July 7, 2023 at 10:30 am. For good cause, the Court finds: ORDER 1. The contested competency hearing shall be continued to July 7, 2023 at 10:30 AM. By the Court: Dayton Klein, Julia 2023.06.14 14:23:20 -05'00' ____________________________________ Julia Dayton Klein Judge of District Court ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-23-1886_Order-Other_2023-07-13_20240430072355.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-23-1886 defendant: MATTHEW DAVID GUERTIN filing_type: Order-Other filing_date: 2023-07-13 pages: 007 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM Filed in District Court State of Minnesota Jul 13, 2023 4:46 pm STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN PROBATE/MENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Court File No. 27-CR-23-1886 State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, FINDINGS OF FACT, v. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER REGARDING Matthew David Guertin, COMPETENCY TO PROCEED Defendant. The above-entitled matter came before the district court, on July 7, 2023, for an evidentiary hearing regarding the Defendant’s competency. The hearing took place in person in Courtroom 456 at the Hennepin County Government Center. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney, appeared for the State. The Defendant appeared along with his attorney, Bruce Rivers, Esq. Jill E. Rogstad, Ph.D., LP, ABPP (Forensic), Senior Clinical Forensic Psychologist at the Fourth Judicial District Court, testified at the hearing and the court received into evidence her Curriculum Vitae (Exhibit 2), and her Forensic Evaluation Report dated March 10, 2023 (Exhibit 3). The court also received into evidence a copy of United States Patent No. 11,577,177 B2 dated February 14, 2023 (Exhibit 1), as well as testimony from the Defendant. The matter was referred for hearing to the undersigned district court referee, who after considering the evidence, the arguments presented, and all the files and records herein, reports to the court making the following recommended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order: 1. Defendant is currently INCOMPETENT to proceed. FINDINGS OF FACT The Defendant, Matthew David Guertin, is charged in MNCIS file 27-CR-23-1886 with Dangerous Weapons-Reckless Discharge of Firearm Within a Municipality (Felony), Firearm- 1 ===== PAGE 002/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM Serial Number-Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), Firearm-Serial Number- Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), and Firearm-Serial Number-Receive/Possess With No Serial Number (Felony), from an incident alleged to have occurred on January 21, 2023. On January 25, 2023, the Honorable Lyonel Norris, Referee of District Court, found probable cause to believe that the offenses were committed and that Defendant committed them. He then ordered that a Rule 20.01 evaluation be completed. Jill E. Rogstad, Ph.D., LP, ABPP (Forensic), was assigned to complete the evaluation of the Defendant. She filed her report on March 10, 2023, opining that Mr. Guertin is incompetent and provided the following diagnoses: Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder (primary). Mr. Guertin challenges Dr. Rogstad’s conclusion, taking the position that he is competent to proceed in his criminal matters. Mr. Guertin testified that he is currently employed as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a start-up company. His company is listed as the assignee on United States Patent No. 11,577,177 B2, and he, as an individual, is listed as the inventor and the applicant. Ex. 1. Mr. Guertin testified that he understands his charges, noting that reckless discharge of a firearm in a municipality is a felony with a maximum of a two-year sentence. He notes that he and his attorney have discussed possible defenses; that he understands the information relayed to him by his attorney; and that there is nothing impeding their relationship. In fact, Mr. Guertin and his attorney, Mr. Rivers, have had a professional relationship for many years. Mr. Guertin also admitted to having been through criminal proceedings in the past. While he acknowledged that he may not understand all the technicalities of criminal proceedings, he indicates that he would ask his attorney if he had questions about the proceedings. Mr. Guertin appeared well-dressed, noting that he wore a tie to court “to be presentable.” He presents as intelligent and passionate about his work with technology, including his patent. However, much of his testimony was focused on his 2 ===== PAGE 003/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM technological work and patent, and he required frequent redirection to stay on point. In fact, there were times during his testimony that Mr. Guertin became lost in his answer to a question because of rambling statements about his patent or other unrelated topics. For instance, when discussing the events that led to what he describes as the “most cordial standoff ever” [with the police], Mr. Guertin began discussing his actions in firing his gun in order to attract the police. He did so instead of calling 911 because he could not trust his electronic devices due to his suspicions involving Netflix and Microsoft and protection of his patent. The court appreciates Mr. Guertin’s testimony and his participation in the hearing; however, the court has serious concerns regard Mr. Guertin’s ability to meaningfully participate in criminal proceedings and understand the process, given his perseveration regarding his patent, and his delusional beliefs about others. Dr. Rogstad opines that Mr. Guertin is not competent to proceed in his criminal matters, concluding in her report “…that Mr. Guertin’s symptoms presently compromise his capacity to understand rationally the proceedings, participate in the defense, and consult rationally with counsel.” Ex. 3, p. 9. Dr. Rogstad offers a diagnosis of Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder (primary). While Dr. Rogstad testified that this is a legitimate diagnosis, she indicated that additional information would be needed to provide more specificity. Dr. Rogstad notes that Mr. Guertin “…displays prominent delusional beliefs that include persecutory and referential themes,” the content and intensity of which “…are highly consistent with phenomenology of the persecutory delusions that can accompany psychotic disorders.” Id. at 7. She further indicates that Mr. Guertin may also suffer from a mood-related disorder, namely mania or hypomania, given “…his frequent digressions and tendency to become distracted by his own thoughts,” which “…were consistent with flight of ideas.” Id. at 8. She also notes that Mr. Guertin was “highly distractible” during the examination, making it “…difficult to extract meaningful, 3 ===== PAGE 004/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM coherent information from him.” Id. The court observed identical behavior during his testimony on July 7, 2023, to that exhibited during his examination. Dr. Rogstad testified that misuse 1 of Adderall could account for some of Mr. Guertin’s symptoms, but acknowledged that she was not a toxicologist or medical doctor and that she did not know how much Adderall Mr. Guertin actually took. Despite reporting this possibility, Dr. Rogstad opines Mr. Guertin is not competent. As a result of his symptoms, Dr. Rogstad believes that Mr. Guertin is unable to participate in the legal process regarding his criminal matters. She credibly testified that while Mr. Guertin has good factual knowledge, he is unable to apply this knowledge due to delusional beliefs. For example, when Mr. Guertin spoke about his delusional beliefs, he indicated he would present evidence supporting these beliefs. In her report, Dr. Rogstad states, “…while he knows the nature of his charges, Mr. Guertin’s delusional beliefs are inextricably linked to his perceptions of his current legal situation, and they obstruct his ability to apply this factual legal knowledge to discussions of his own case in a rational manner devoid of delusional reasoning.” Id. at 9. Specifically, Dr. Rogstad reports that his delusions impacted his perception of relevant evidence, that he supported the choices he made “…with impaired perceptions of objective reality,” and that ultimately, he was unable to participate in “consistently coherent” and “reality-based” discussions regarding the proceedings. Id. Her testimony supports these conclusions when she states that Mr. Guertin did not understand evidence or the ramifications of making decisions because of the delusions that emerged as they were discussing legal proceedings. Dr. Rogstad also testified that Mr. Guertin lacks insight into his mental health, as evidenced by his belief that he is under duress as opposed to having any impaired perceptions. Finally, Dr. Rogstad testified that neither her report nor her opinion changed after observing Mr. Guertin’s testimony during the July 7, 2023 hearing. 1 Mr. Guertin testified that he takes additional dosages of his Adderall medication on long days because the medication is “fast-acting.” He gave one example as working overnight at Coachella to finish an art piece for the next day. 4 ===== PAGE 005/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM The court finds that the greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is not competent to proceed at this time. He suffers from a mental illness with a diagnosis of Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder, as offered by Dr. Rogstad. This may also include a mood component, namely mania or hypomania. This mental illness prevents Mr. Guertin from rationally understanding the legal process and obstructs his ability to prepare a defense or rationally consult with his counsel. Dr. Rogstad persuasively reports that Mr. Guertin’s delusions impact his strategical decisions. For instance, he indicated that providing testimony at his trial would serve “…as a way to ‘have the opportunity to make all this stuff [about his perceived persecution] public in the courtroom,’” with similar thoughts regarding evidence he collected. Ex. 3, p. 9. Additionally, the court observed Mr. Guertin testify, during which his answers often wandered towards the themes of technology, patents, and competitors. While it is evident that Mr. Guertin is an intelligent, talented individual with a passion for technology, this does not necessarily make him competent to proceed in his criminal matters. He may understand the factual components of criminal proceedings, but it is evident to the court that he is unable to apply this factual knowledge in his defense. Based upon the totality of evidence before the court including Mr. Guertin’s testimony, Dr. Rogstad’s testimony, and the exhibits received into evidence, the court concludes that the greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is not currently competent to proceed and thus, the defense has not met their burden of proof. In summary, the court finds the testimony and report of Dr. Rogstad to be the most credible and persuasive evidence regarding Mr. Guertin’s competency to proceed. Dr. Rogstad has extensive experience conducting forensic evaluations, including having completed approximately 400 forensic evaluations. See also Ex. 2. Her report was thorough and considered several possible factors contributing to Mr. Guertin’s symptoms, as well as the significance of those symptoms. 5 ===== PAGE 006/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM The court also notes the similarity in Mr. Guertin’s presentation during both his evaluation and at the July 7, 2023 hearing: Mr. Guertin presented as verbose, with responses to questions that included excessive detail. He often brought his responses back to the themes of technology, patents, and competitors; and on occasion, had to ask that questions be repeated due to his extensive responses. Mr. Guertin appears to the court to be unable to separate matters involving his criminal charges from his delusional thoughts regarding his technology. It was evident that he continues to suffer from mental health concerns that impact his ability to fully understand and engage in the proceedings regarding his criminal matters. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW “A defendant has a due process right not to be tried or convicted of a criminal charge if he or she is legally incompetent.” Bonga v. State, 797 N.W.2d 712, 718 (Minn. 2011). Rule 20.01 of the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that if the court finds by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant is competent, it must enter an order finding the defendant competent to proceed. Minn. R. Crim. P. Rule 20.01, subd. 5(c). A defendant is incompetent and must not plead, be tried, or be sentenced if the defendant due to mental illness or cognitive impairment lacks ability to: (a) rationally consult with counsel; or (b) understand the proceedings or participate in the defense. Id., subd. 2. The determination of whether a defendant is able to rationally consult with the defense attorney or understand and participate in the proceedings turns on the facts of each particular case. Moreover, fact-finders, including district courts, are not required to accept an expert’s testimony or recommendations. State v. Roberts, 876 N.W.2d 863, 868 (Minn. 2016). Foremost, throughout the criminal proceedings the trial court must be mindful of its protective duty to ensure that a defendant is competent to proceed. See State v. 6 ===== PAGE 007/007 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 7/13/2023 1:24 PM Bauer, 245 N.W.2d 848, 852 (Minn. 1976) (ruling that the court should have conducted further inquiry into the important matter of defendant’s competency). The greater weight of the evidence establishes that Mr. Guertin is incompetent to proceed. ORDER Defendant, Matthew David Guertin, is currently INCOMPETENT to proceed. Order Recommended By: BY THE COURT: _______________________________ Referee of District Court Judge of District Court 7 ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-23-1886_Request for Continuance Needing Judicial Approval_2023-02-20_20240430072359.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-23-1886 defendant: MATTHEW DAVID GUERTIN filing_type: Request for Continuance Needing Judicial Approval filing_date: 2023-02-20 pages: 001 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/001 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/20/2023 1:59 PM Rivers Law Firm, P.A. 701 Building Suite 300 701 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Attorney: Law Offices Bruce Rivers Telephone 612.339.3939 Email: bruce@riverslawyers.com Facsimile 612.332.4003 Paralegal: www.riverslawyers.com Kelly Wilson Email: kwilson@riverslawyers.com February 20, 2023 Hennepin County Courthouse Attn: Criminal Division 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Mn 55487 Re: State of Minnesota v. Matthew David Guertin Court File No.: 27-CR-23-1886 Dear Sir or Madam: I would like to bring to the Courts attention that I have been recently retained by my client in the above mentioned matter. Mr. Guertin is currently scheduled for Omnibus Hearing Wednesday, February 22 at 1:30pm, I will be in a jury trial at that time. Respectfully, I am asking that we continue this matter to a later date. My office contacted the Hennepin County Attorney's Office and we left a message for Mrs. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant County Attorney, and we are waiting for her response. If my request is granted, it would be greatly appreciated if someone from scheduling could contact my office to schedule a date together to prevent future continuance requests. Respectfully, /s/ Bruce Rivers BMR:ar cc. Ms. Jacqueline Perez, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney. ===== DOC: MCRO_27-CR-23-1886_Request for Continuance Needing Judicial Approval_2023-03-27_20240430072358.pdf ===== --- meta case_number: 27-CR-23-1886 defendant: MATTHEW DAVID GUERTIN filing_type: Request for Continuance Needing Judicial Approval filing_date: 2023-03-27 pages: 001 --- end meta ===== PAGE 001/001 ===== 27-CR-23-1886 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 3/27/2023 2:52 PM Rivers Law Firm, P.A. 701 Building Suite 300 701 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Attorney: Law Offices Bruce Rivers Telephone 612.339.3939 Email: bruce@riverslawyers.com Facsimile 612.332.4003 Paralegal: www.riverslawyers.com Kelly Wilson Email: kwilson@riverslawyers.com March 27, 2023 Hennepin Goverment Center Attn: Criminal Division 300 South Sixth St Minneapolis, MN 55487 Re: State of Minnesota v. Matthew David Guertin Court File No.: 27-CR-23-1886 Dear Sir or Madam: The above matter is currently scheduled for a Hearing tomorrow, March 28 at 1:30 pm. Beginning March 28, Mr. Rivers will be in a Jury Trial (27-CR-20-24996) starting with Jury selection. I respectfully request that we continue with Mr. Matthew David Guertin until a later date. My Office contacted Ms. Jacqueline Perez and Mr. Tom Arneson and they do not object. If my request is granted, I would greatly appreciate it if someone from scheduling would contact my office to set up a date together to prevent future continuation requests. Respectfully, /s/ Bruce Rivers BMR:ar cc. Jacqueline Perez, County District Attorney Tom Arneson, Assistant Hennepin County Attorney .