Contested Omnibus Hearing

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

What is an Omnibus Hearing?

In Minnesota criminal law, we have two related phrases that refer to two different things: (1) the Omnibus Hearing; and (2) the Contested Omnibus Hearing. At a Contested Omnibus Hearing, a judge may consider conflicting testimony and evidence, and decide defenses motions to suppress and dismiss.

Why “Omnibus?” Many things in the law only make sense from a historical perspective. Until the early 1960s, criminal lawyers brought several pretrial motions before judges at different hearings in the court process. Then Minnesota Supreme Court adopted our Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Rules encourage combining these many hearings into one, “Omnibus” hearing. “Omnibus” means combining many into one.

Courts first hold an “Omnibus Hearing” within the rule’s 28-day time limit, or later if the defense waives that time limit. Typically, the defense may file motions raising pretrial issues requesting an evidentiary hearing or “Contested Omnibus Hearing,” where the issues are “contested” by the defense and prosecution.

What happens at a “Contested Omnibus Hearing?”

At a Contested Omnibus Hearing in Minnesota, a judge decides defense pretrial motions after a contested evidentiary hearing.

Context: A jury trial will decide a criminal charge, unless the parties (or a judge) resolve it first. Several court appearances will happen before any trial. But the most important is the Contested Omnibus Hearing.

Preparation: The defense attorney will review available evidence. And I will identify legal issues that could help the defendant at a pretrial hearing. Available evidence could include:

• evidence identified by the client,
• work product of a defense investigator and the defense lawyer, and
• discovery from the prosecutor and police investigators.

Defense motions: The defense lawyer can challenge the admissibility of prosecution evidence. Is the prosecution’s evidence “the fruit of the poisonous tree?” When police get evidence by violating the law, a judge won’t allow it into evidence. A judge can order the prosecution evidence suppressed. And if a judge suppresses illegal evidence, that means the government can’t use it at trial.

Different “Probable cause” standards

One issue the defense can raise at a Contested Omnibus Hearing is Probable Cause. Is there enough evidence to justify a jury trial? But the meaning of the term “probable cause” differs depending upon context and stage in the process:

1. police officer’s probable cause to arrest,
2. prosecutor’s probable cause to charge in a Complaint, and
3. judge’s probable cause to hold the case over for trial.

And all of these are different. So, the closer the case gets to trial, the more evidence the government must have to justify it.

The defense attorney may make a motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause at First Appearance (or Arraignment), and-or at the Contested Omnibus Hearing. And sometimes after suppressing evidence, any remaining evidence is not enough. And so a judge will then dismiss a charge for lack of lawful evidence to support probable cause.

Rasmussen hearing: In State ex rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash, 141 NW2d 3, 13 (1965), the Minnesota Supreme Court outlined the procedures for notice and pretrial hearing to be followed when evidence obtained through search and seizure or confessions will be introduced by the state at trial. These “Rasmussen issues” can heard at the Contested Omnibus Hearing, under the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Florence hearing: A contested probable cause hearing can be part of a Contested Omnibus Hearing.

“The purpose of the probable cause hearing is to ‘screen[ ] out cases which, for one reason or another, ought not to be prosecuted’ because the record as a whole contains an insufficient factual basis to support the offense charged.”

State v. Florence, 239 N.W.2d 892, 896-97 n.4, 900 (1976)

A police officer might have probable cause “to arrest.” A prosecutor might have probable cause “to charge” a crime initially in a Complaint. And yet a judge may find evidence lacking probable cause for a trial, after a Florence hearing. (Some but not all Contested Omnibus Hearings are also Florence hearings.)

Remedies differ

If a judge suppresses illegal evidence, the order may preclude its use completely; or only under some circumstances. But what does that mean?

Inadmissible for any purpose: For example, if police obtain an involuntary “confession,” we cannot trust that “confession” to be accurate. So the judge suppresses it for all purposes. And if the defendant should exercise her right to testify, the prosecutor can’t even use it to impeach her credibility. (So, this is why police attempt to get “voluntary” statements.)

Inadmissible in prosecution case-in-chief: A judge may suppress a “confession” after an in-custody questioning without a Miranda rights warning. And then the prosecutor cannot use the illegal statement in his initial, case-in-chief. But, the Miranda case focused on deterring police misconduct (not unreliability of the coerced confession). So the prosecutor can still impeach the defendant with the suppressed statement should she testify. But this effectively destroys the defendant’s Fifth Amendment Right to Testify.

Motions at Contested Omnibus Hearing

A written “motion” asks a judge for a legal remedy, while providing a legal legal basis for it. Lawyers serve their opponent a copy, and file their written motions with the court. The types of pre-trial motions for judicial relief that a defense lawyer might make include motions to suppress evidence:

• obtained due to illegal Fourth Amendment Seizure
• as a result of an unlawfully expanded detention,
• due to illegal search, or
• improper identification procedure

And motions to suppress statements and confessions:

• Involuntary Statements, Admissions, Confessions
• statements and Admissions due to a violation of Miranda warning rights
• due to other Constitutional and statutory law violations by police

Where the facts support them, we can make motions to dismiss:

• improperly enhanced charges
• improper mandatory minimum sentencing requests

And other pretrial defense motions for help from a judge that may be necessary:

• an Order compelling disclosure and discovery of evidence

Contested

In a “contested” hearing, lawyers may question witnesses, present evidence and argue the law. The other side contests some evidence or applicable law. And other evidence may come into the hearing record uncontested.

The Contested Omnibus Hearing is like a trial to a judge. The legal issues raised, along with facts and testimony, are the focus. But there is no jury. The Defendant may testify, or not. If she does testify, the Prosecutor will not be able to use that testimony at the trial later, as part of their case-in-chief. The Government cannot require the defendant to give up one right (5th Amendment) in order to exercise another (right to testify). The U.S. Supreme Court wrote:

“We find it intolerable that one constitutional right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another. We therefore hold that, when a defendant testifies in support of a motion to suppress evidence on Fourth Amendment grounds, his testimony may not thereafter be admitted against him at trial on the issue of guilt unless he makes no objection.”

Simmons v. U.S., 390 US 389 (1968)

The lawyers will identify the key legal issues before the hearing begins. And they may argue the law at the end. Or, after the hearing, the lawyers may help the judge by writing opposing legal briefs (or Memoranda of Law). The judge will then rule, and order or deny the requested relief, usually in a written Order some weeks later.

Result: Depending upon the legal issues raised by the defense attorney, the judge’s decision to suppress evidence may be dispositive. “Dispositive” means it disposes of the case, ending it. So, a judge’s Order dismissing the criminal charges is dispositive.

Other times, an Order to Suppress Evidence may not result in dismissal of charges. But it may still take away some of the prosecution’s evidence at trial. And this improves the defense case for trial.

Preserving issues for appeal

Often, either party could eventually appeal the loss of the Contested Omnibus Hearing. An appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals may claim that the judge made a legal error; and ask the appellate court to correct it. The appellate courts might not give the same level of review to issues raised on appeal unless first raised below at the Contested Omnibus Hearing or at trial. So, the defense should “preserve issues for appeal” by bringing them up with the trial judge.

Preparation

A good defense attorney begins exploring potential pre-trial motions from the first meeting with the client. And this work continues throughout the defense case. There will not be viable pre-trial motions in every case. But defense attorneys are always looking for them. These are powerful tools for the defense.

Question? Call Attorney Thomas Gallagher, 612 333-1500

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Thomas Gallagher is the author of this page.

More: contested omnibus hearing

Minnesota Court Process Guide: Steps

Pretrial Conference | Rule 8 Appearance

Domestic Assault Charges Dismissal

Blog articles: Pre-trial Motions to Dismiss

Suppressing Illegal Evidence

Obstruction & Resisting Arrest