Vaundell Duwayne Kingbird v. State of Minnesota

Grand Rapids, Minnesota criminal defense lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendants seeking compensation for having been exonerated on being a felon in possession of a firearm.



Vaundell Duwayne Kingbird was exonerated for purposes of the statute used to determine if a person whose

conviction has been reversed, vacated, or set aside is eligible for compensation based on

exoneration, Minn. Stat. § 590.11 (2020) (the eligibility- for-exoneration-compensation-

statute). The applicable definition of " exonerated” requires Kingbird to establish "any

evidence of factual innocence.” Id., subd. 1(b)(1), 1(c)(2).



Kingbird was convicted in 2010 of violating Minn. Stat. § 609.165, subd. 1b(a)

(2014), which makes it a crime for certain convicted felons to possess a firearm. After we

held in State v. Haywood, 886 N.W.2d 485, 487 (Minn. 2016), that an air-compressed BB

gun is not a "firearm” under this statute, Kingbird's conviction was vacated. Kingbird then

filed a petition for an order determining that he was eligible for compensation based on

exoneration. The district court denied the petition, and the court of appeals affirmed. We

conclude that Kingbird has not provided any evidence of factual innocence.

Affirmed