State of Minnesota v. Larry Joe Foster

Syllabus

1. Appellant did not properly preserve the question of whether a defendant, who has satisfied the required test to present an alternative perpetrator defense, is entitled to call the alternative perpetrator to appear before the jury for a nontestimonial purpose. 2. When a defendant has satisfied the required test to present an alternative perpetrator defense, a district court has discretion under the ordinary rules of evidence to allow the defendant to call the alternative perpetrator as a trial witness, even when it is known that the alternative perpetrator will invoke their right against self-incrimination in the presence of the jury. 3. The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant's request to call an alternative perpetrator to the witness stand based on needless presentation of cumulative evidence. Affirmed.