At the conclusion of Wednesday’s hearing, restraints for Steven James Erickson again became an issue.

Thursday, August 19, 1999

At the conclusion of Wednesday’s hearing, restraints for Steven James Erickson again became an issue. Erickson, a native of Mower County, is currently serving a life sentence for the first-degree murder of Michael Hjelman; a murder which occurred in July of 1997.

Greg Colby, who represented Erickson at the special Schwartz hearing Wednesday, asked that Erickson not be handcuffed when the hearing continued next Thursday, or that alternative restraints be used.

"It’s plain uncomfortable for him wearing these handcuffs," Colby said. " … The handcuffs also make it more difficult for him to write."

When county attorney Pat Oman recommended that the request not be granted because he understood that Erickson had "been involved in assaultive behavior while incarcerated", Rysavy reserved judgement, but made a point of pointing out other considerations: that Erickson had a confrontation with jail staff while incarcerated in Mower County, that he had threatened one of the primary witnesses, that he had made a statement in the courtroom that "could be interpreted as threatening" toward the county attorney and that Rysavy didn’t know if there were acceptable alternative restraints.

The leg restraints Erickson wore under his clothing during the original trial were part of the reason the hearing was ordered by the Minnesota Supreme Court. A Schwartz hearing is held to determine the effect of errors in a trail on a jury’s decision making process.

The Supreme Court pointed to three errors in its demand for a Schwartz hearing.

1) The court was concerned that the jury was allowed to separate during deliberations.

2) The court was concerned about possible improper conduct between a bailiff and the jury. The bailiff brought in a blow-up of the Hjelman floor plan that was never admitted in that size as court evidence into the jury deliberation room.

3) Erickson was required to wear a leg restraint at trial without findings to justify it. On May 7, 1998, the state Supreme Court ruled that the court must record its reasons for requiring a defendant to wear leg restraints.

Erickson had been convicted two days before that.

Wednesday was only a brief preview of next Thursday’s continuation of the Schwartz hearing: only one juror, Randy John Bremner, was present. Bremner won’t be in Austin for the proper hearing, because he has to go back to his university in Provo, Utah, next week.

Judge Rysavy, who conducted the original trial, is conducting the staggered hearing and asked the witness the court’s questions. Both his questions and the subsequent questions asked by Colby centered around the three errors as determined by the Supreme Court, and whether they were factors in Bremner’s decision-making process.

The main word from Bremner was "no."No, he did not speak to anyone about the trial or deliberations when he went home the first night of jury deliberations. No, he did not have any contact with media then. No, he did not hear or hear of any comments from bailiffs concerning Erickson’s guilt or innocence, or the evidence. No, the blow up of the floor plan wasn’t a factor in his decision. No, he didn’t notice that Erickson was wearing leg restraints by seeing them or noticing any awkwardness of movement, but he "figured" Erickson probably was.

Erickson will be held in the Mower County Jail through next Thursday, rather than being returned to Stillwater. After the hearing, Rysavy will report back to the Supreme Court. If he determines that the errors did not influence the jury, the defendant’s lawyer can go before the Supreme Court and argue otherwise. Or, the judge can find that the errors were influential and order a new trial.