Among the bills recently passed by the Minnesota legislature was an award of $4.5 million to Marvin Haynes, Jr. for his purportedly wrongful conviction of the murder of Randy Sherer. Haynes had been found guilty by a jury in 2006 and sentenced to life in prison. The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld Haynes’ conviction on appeal.
Haynes’ conviction was vacated only because of the immoral actions of Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, conduct which the legislature and local press have refused to examine.
The justification for Moriarty’s decision related solely to the procedures used to identify Haynes as the perpetrator of this crime. Those procedures were thoroughly litigated before the start of the trial. An experienced and respected judge found nothing improper. Haynes’ appellate counsel, also experienced and respected, was so convinced of the correctness of this decision that she never even raised the issue on appeal.
For 19 years Haynes sat silently in his cell, never complaining that he was wrongfully incarcerated. He filed no additional appeals or petitions for relief. He sought no publicity nor made claims that he was falsely convicted of the charges. He did nothing—that is until Mary Moriarty was elected Hennepin County attorney.
In August of 2024, Moriarty stipulated that the identification procedures violated Haynes’ constitutional rights and vacated his conviction, overturning the decisions of the original trial judge and, by implication, the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Her unilateral decision had profound implications. It released a man properly convicted of a heinous crime without first providing the victims and public with a full and fair hearing justifying the reasons. It rewarded Haynes for his crime by making him a millionaire at taxpayer expense without first having a neutral judge examine and rule on the strength of the evidence. It was yet another of a long list of catastrophic decisions Moriarty has made that are contrary to her duty to protect the citizens she was elected to serve.
One would have to have been in a coma for the last 3½ years to not recognize the pro-criminal bias exhibited during Moriarty’s tenure. People will remember how Gov. Tim Walz was forced to take the unprecedented step of removing Moriarty from the case against Foday Kamara after she offered him an unspeakably lenient sentence for his part in the murder of Zaria McKeever. People will also remember how a district court judge refused to accept another lenient plea bargain Moriarty offered Husayn Braveheart who helped murder Steve Markey during a botched carjacking. Lastly, people can no doubt recall how Moriarty ultimately dismissed charges against Trooper Ryan Londregan for the fatal shooting of Ricky Cobb II after a Texas law firm, who had received almost $600K of taxpayer money, told her there wasn’t a case to be made against the trooper, and just before the governor was again going to take the unusual step of removing the case from Moriarty’s office. These are but a few examples. Moriarty’s conduct in the Haynes case is no less egregious.
Marvin Haynes was not even entitled to a hearing on his post-conviction petition. The law prohibited that relief unless Haynes could demonstrate that he possessed newly discovered evidence. Haynes could not since all of his complaints were a mere re-hashing of the issues he raised before trial. It was only because Moriarty agreed to waive the State’s objections that Haynes’ petition was allowed to proceed.
In addition, Haynes was allowed to introduce expert testimony on the question of the identification procedures, something prohibited under Minnesota case law. Again, Moriarty threw out the rule of law to favor a convicted murderer and allowed Haynes to admit evidence even the State was prohibited from using.
Third, and most appalling, Moriarty’s prosecutors were specifically instructed to not contest Haynes’ evidence. In effect, they were told to “take a dive.” This meant that Haynes’ petition was never going to be meaningfully contested, and the victims and public were cheated out of their right to a full and fair hearing.
I was the prosecutor that convicted Marvin Haynes in 2006. I followed Haynes’ post-conviction petition with some interest, thinking that I would likely be a part of the State’s effort to contest it.
When I read that a witness testified to events that were different from what had actually occurred, I contacted the prosecutors involved to offer myself as a rebuttal witness. Anna Light and Adam Petras were then assigned to the case.
Ms. Light and Mr. Petras told me they weren’t interested in my testimony which I thought was curious. I then told them that I had been contacted by a reporter from KARE 11 who was covering the case, and who told me he “wanted to hear from someone who thought Haynes was guilty.” Petras then said he wasn’t surprised to hear that as they were under orders to not contest Haynes’ evidence. He wouldn’t tell me who specifically told them that but felt that Mary Moriarty was the source of the order.
This is outrageous and immoral conduct for a prosecutor. A review of the entire scenario makes it clear that the decision to vacate Haynes’ conviction was made long before his petition was even filed. The public deserves to know why. What did Moriarty get out of this? What was her reward? What, if anything, was she promised?
And it’s not over! Haynes’ greed is such that he’s not satisfied with a mere $4.5 million—he wants more. He still has a lawsuit pending against the Minneapolis Police Department. Perhaps it can be used to answer these questions. One can only hope that someone will stand up and, in the name of Randy Sherer, demand an explanation for Moriarty’s immoral and unethical actions.
Mike Furnstahl is a former assistant Hennepin County attorney.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not represent an official position of Alpha News.
Mike Furnstahl
Mike Furnstahl is a former assistant Hennepin County attorney.
