State of Minnesota, Respondent,

This opinion is nonprecedential except as provided by
Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c).

STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
A22-1269

State of Minnesota,
Respondent,

vs.

Damien Paul Johnson,
Appellant.

Filed August 7, 2023
Affirmed
Worke, Judge

Clay County District Court
File No. 14-CR-22-55

Keith Ellison, Attorney General, St. Paul, Minnesota; and

Brian J. Melton, Clay County Attorney, Pamela L. Foss, Chief Assistant County Attorney,
Moorhead, Minnesota (for respondent)

Cathryn Middlebrook, Chief Appellate Public Defender, St. Paul, Minnesota; and

Paul J. Maravigli, Special Assistant State Public Defender, Minneapolis, Minnesota (for
appellant)

Considered and decided by Bratvold, Presiding Judge; Worke, Judge; and Connolly,
Judge.
NONPRECEDENTIAL OPINION
WORKE, Judge
Appellant challenges his first-degree assault conviction, arguing that the evidence
was insufficient to establish venue and identity. We affirm.
2
FACTS
For two months, J.L. dated appellant Damien Paul Johnson. Their relationship
ended on December 31, 2021, after Johnson left J.L. at a hospital with a severe stab wound
to her leg, a broken nose, black eyes, and bruises all over her body.
Respondent State of Minnesota charged Johnson with assault. At Johnson’s jury
trial, J.L. testified that her relationship with Johnson was “toxic”; they fought often. J.L.
testified that Johnson “usually would hit [her] on [her] legs, because then nobody could see
it.” On the night of December 31, J.L. and Johnson were at J.L.’s house in Fargo, North
Dakota, drinking alcohol before going to a party in Moorhead, Minnesota. J.L. sent her
sister a text message at 10:16 p.m. stating that she was on her way to the party. J.L. testified
that she did not “really know” what time she and Johnson arrived at the party, but thought
it was “[n]ine or ten-ish.”
J.L. and Johnson got separated at the party. J.L. heard that Johnson was mad at her.
When she found him, he grabbed her hair, dragged her upstairs, and hit her. Some girls
intervened and brought J.L. into a bathroom. J.L. heard Johnson screaming at her. She
told the girls that she was fine and went out by Johnson. The party host wanted J.L. and
Johnson to leave because of their fighting. J.L. testified that they were not at the party for
very long, maybe a half-hour, but she did not know what time they left.
Johnson grabbed J.L.’s hair and dragged her outside. As they walked to Johnson’s
vehicle, J.L. dropped her phone. It was icy outside and her phone slid under a vehicle. She
asked Johnson for help. Johnson picked up J.L.’s phone, pulled her off the ground, and
3
“started beating on [her].” Johnson grabbed her hair, punched her, dragged her, and hit her
face.
Johnson beat J.L. outside of his vehicle and hit J.L.’s head on the concrete. J.L
testified that she did not remember getting into Johnson’s vehicle. She either “blacked out”
because she drank too much or lost consciousness because Johnson “knocked [her] out.”
The next thing she recalled was being in the vehicle with her hand on her leg and “blood
everywhere.” Johnson was driving and crying, asking, “[W] here’s a hospital; where’s a
hospital; where’s a hospital?” He was also “banging his hands on the steering wheel and
he was like . . . what did I do[?]”
The prosecutor asked J.L., “Do you recall where you were at . . . this point?” She
replied, “Not really. I think we were still in Moorhead.” J.L. testified that after she got
stabbed, she “believe[d]” that they were still in Moorhead, and that when she “came to” in
the vehicle, they were “in the area of the party.” J.L. was “pretty sure” and “fairly certain”
that they were in Moorhead. On cross-examination, J.L. agreed that the party was not “far
from the [North Dakota] border.”
J.L. testified that she directed Johnson to a hospital in downtown Fargo, but no one
was there because there was no emergency room. They left to find another hospital but
J.L. did not remember how they got to the next hospital. When they arrived at the second
hospital, Johnson handed J.L. to a security officer and left; J.L never saw Johnson again.
The security officer testified that Johnson and J.L. arrived “approximately five
minutes to midnight.” He testified that he asked J.L., “Who did this to you” and she replied,
“He did.”
4
J.L.’s sister testified that Johnson arrived at her mom’s house on December 31
“crying [and] hollering something about [J.L.] being jumped and stabbed at a party.” J.L.’s
sister asked Johnson what happened. Johnson told her that J.L. “got drunk and stabbed”
but he was not there to see it happen and did not call the police because he did not have a
phone.
J.L. was in the hospital for six days and underwent three surgeries on her leg. The
surgeon who operated on J.L.’s leg testified that she had a deep stab wound that required a
tourniquet to stop the bleeding. He testified that if they had not performed the surgery, J.L.
“would have bled to death.”
The first Fargo police officer to arrive at the hospital testified that J.L. stated that
her boyfriend stabbed her. The second time the officer talked to J.L., she told him that
Johnson pulled her out of a party and when they were in his vehicle, Johnson hit her across
the face and then stabbed her in the leg with a knife.
A Moorhead police officer testified that he was notified by Fargo law enforcement
that J.L. had been stabbed at a party in Moorhead. J.L. reported to the Moorhead officer
that when she realized she had been stabbed, she was in Johnson’s vehicle, which had not
moved from where it was parked down the block from the party in Moorhead. A flyer for
the party also confirmed that the party occurred in Moorhead.
Johnson did not testify. The jury found him guilty as charged. The district court
sentenced Johnson to 86 months in prison. This appeal followed.
5
DECISION
Johnson argues that his conviction must be reversed for insufficient evidence
because the state failed to establish where the assault occurred or that he stabbed J.L.
Venue
Venue is an element of every crime, and the state must prove beyond a reasonable
doubt that the alleged crime occurred in the charging county. Minn. Const. art. I, § 6;
State v. Bahri, 514 N.W.2d 580, 582 (Minn. App. 1994), rev. denied (Minn. June 15,
1994). The state is not required to prove venue by direct evidence. Bahri, 514 N.W.2d at
582. Rather, it can be established “by all the reasonable inferences arising from the totality
of the surrounding circumstances.” State v. Carignan, 272 N.W.2d 748, 749 (Minn. 1978).
Thus, venue may be established by circumstantial evidence. Bahri, 514 N.W.2d at 582.
The parties agree the state used circumstantial evidence to prove venue.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence from which a fact-finder can “infer whether the facts
in dispute existed or did not exist.” State v. Harris, 895 N.W.2d 592, 599 (Minn. 2017)
(quotation omitted). “[C]ircumstantial evidence always requires an inferential step to
prove a fact that is not required with direct evidence.” Id. When a conviction is based on
circumstantial evidence, we apply a heightened two-step standard of review. Loving v.
State, 891 N.W.2d 638, 643 (Minn. 2017).
First, we identify the circumstances proved. State v. Andersen, 784 N.W.2d 320,
329 (Minn. 2010). Second, we “determine whether the circumstances proved are consistent
with guilt and inconsistent with any rational hypothesis except that of guilt.” State v.
Silvernail, 831 N.W.2d 594, 599 (Minn. 2013) (quotations omitted). We look at the
6
circumstantial evidence as a whole and do not defer to the fact-finder’s choice between
reasonable inferences. Id. Despite this stricter standard of review, the jury’s verdict is still
given due deference because the jury is in the best position to evaluate the evidence.
State v. Webb, 440 N.W.2d 426, 430 (Minn. 1989). “As in all cases, the jury determines
the credibility and weight given to the testimony of individual witnesses.” State v. Bias,
419 N.W.2d 480, 484 (Minn. 1988).
We first identify the circumstances proved:
(1) At 10:16 p.m. on December 31, 2021, J.L. sent her sister a text message stating
that she was on her way to a party; (2) the party was in Moorhead, Minnesota, not “far
from the [North Dakota] border”; (3) J.L. did not “really know” what time she and Johnson
arrived at the party but guessed that it was around “[n]ine or ten-ish”; (4) Johnson dragged
J.L. out of the party after maybe a half-hour; (5) J.L. dropped her phone walking to
Johnson’s vehicle; (6) J.L.’s phone slid underneath a vehicle and J.L. asked Johnson for
help; (7) Johnson retrieved the phone, picked up J.L., then beat her; (8) Johnson hit J.L.’s
head on the concrete outside the vehicle; (9) J.L. “blacked out” before waking up with her
hand on her leg, “blood . . . seeping through [her] hands,” and realizing that she had been
stabbed; (10) there was a significant amount of blood in the vehicle; (11) Johnson asked
the location of a hospital and was driving “in the area of the party”; (12) J.L. thought that
they were still in Moorhead and directed Johnson to a hospital in Fargo; (13) there was
nobody at the hospital, so Johnson “got in the car” and drove to another hospital;
(14) Johnson arrived at the second hospital “approximately five minutes to midnight”;
(15) Johnson told J.L.’s sister that J.L. had been “jumped and stabbed at a party”; (16) J.L.
7
told the first responding officer that Johnson stabbed her inside the vehicle; and (17) J.L.
told a Moorhead officer that when she realized she had been stabbed, she was in the vehicle
and the vehicle had not moved from its parking spot down the block from the party in
Moorhead.
Second, we assess whether the circumstances proved are consistent with the
conclusion that the offense occurred in Moorhead, Clay County, and inconsistent with a
reasonable hypothesis that it occurred in Fargo. The circumstances permit a reasonable
conclusion that Johnson stabbed J.L. in the vehicle while they were parked outside the
party in Moorhead. See State v. Johnson, 568 N.W.2d 426, 435 (Minn. 1997) (stating that
evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the conviction and the reviewing
court must assume that the jury believed the state’s witnesses and disbelieved any
contradictory evidence). But Johnson claims that there is a two-hour gap between when
he and J.L. left the party and when they arrived at the hospital in Fargo. Johnson suggests
that in the two- hour gap, he and J.L. went to her house in Fargo, where, he claims, the
stabbing occurred. Johnson bases this timeline on J.L. leaving the party “at approximately
10:00 p.m.” and arriving at the second hospital a few minutes before midnight.
J.L. sent her sister a text message at 10:16 p.m. stating that she was on the way to
the party. This shows that J.L. and Johnson did not leave the party at approximately
10:00 p.m. Johnson did not park in front of the house where the party was located but
parked down the block. He and J.L. left the house after approximately one-half hour and
walked back to the vehicle. J.L. and Johnson stopped at least two times —when J.L.
dropped her phone and when Johnson beat J.L. J.L. did not remember getting into the
8
vehicle, likely because Johnson hit her head on the concrete. It is unknown how long she
was unconscious, but she told an officer that when she regained consciousness and realized
that she was stabbed, the vehicle was still parked in Moorhead at the party location.
Johnson then drove to a hospital. He got out of the vehicle and found that there was
no emergency department. He got back into the vehicle and found his way to a second
hospital. The record shows that Johnson is not from the Fargo area and did not know where
the hospitals were located, and J.L. testified that she did not remember getting to the second
hospital. The record does not support a reasonable hypothesis that there was a two-hour
gap between J.L. and Johnson leaving the party and arriving at the second hospital.
Johnson also claims that J.L.’s wound was so significant that she would have bled
out and died if they were not close to the hospital in Fargo. But the surgeon testified that
J.L. could have bled out if she did not receive surgery. The surgeon did not testify about a
timeframe that would have resulted in J.L.’s death if her wound was untreated. Finally,
Johnson told J.L.’s sister that J.L. was stabbed at the party. The circumstantial evidence,
taken as a whole, supports a reasonable conclusion that venue was in Moorhead and does
not support a rational hypothesis that the stabbing occurred in Fargo.
Identity
Johnson also argues that the state failed to prove that he committed the stabbing
because J.L. did not see it occur. Again, we conduct the two-step circumstantial-evidence
analysis because J.L. stated that she was unconscious, and when she awoke, she realized
that she had been stabbed.
The circumstances proved regarding identity are as follows:
9
(1) J.L. and Johnson were in a “toxic” relationship in which they fought a lot;
(2) Johnson “usually would hit” J.L. on her legs to conceal the wounds; (3) J.L. and
Johnson got into a fight at the party; (4) J.L. and Johnson left the party together; (5) Johnson
beat J.L. as they walked to the vehicle; (6) J.L. lost consciousness and awoke with blood
everywhere realizing that she had been stabbed in the leg; (7) Johnson was crying, “banging
his hands on the steering wheel,” and stating, “What did I do”; (8) nobody else was in the
vehicle; (9) Johnson left J.L. at the hospital; (10) J.L. told the security officer that Johnson
caused her injury; (11) Johnson told J.L.’s sister that J.L. had been stabbed at the party but
that he did not call police because he did not have a phone; and (12) J.L. told law
enforcement that Johnson stabbed her.
These circumstances proved that Johnson stabbed J.L. First, they were the only
people in the vehicle and the vehicle was covered in blood. Second, Johnson was angry
with J.L. and assaulted her at the party, causing the host to ask them to leave. In the past
when Johnson had been angry with J.L., he attacked her legs. And during this incident,
J.L. was stabbed in the leg. J.L. also heard Johnson state: “What did I do?” Johnson then
left J.L. at the hospital. J.L. told the hospital security officer that Johnson attacked her.
And she told law enforcement that Johnson stabbed her. The circumstantial evidence
against Johnson is overwhelming. There are no other reasonable hypotheses showing that
another individual stabbed J.L. Therefore, the evidence of identity was sufficient.
Affirmed.