Judge denies new trial for Drew Blahnik, convicted of Chris Bagley murder

CEDAR RAPIDS — A judge this week flatly denied a new trial for Drew Blahnik, convicted of fatally stabbing Chris Bagley in 2018.

Sixth Judicial District Judge Christopher Bruns, in denying all Blahnik’s arguments, ruled there was sufficient evidence to show Blahnik plotted and carried out Bagley’s murder by repeatedly stabbing Bagley “with such ferocity” that it showed the killing was unjustified.

A Linn County in July convicted Blahnik, 34, of second-degree murder and other charges. He faces up to 57 years in prison at his sentencing, set for Dec. 17.

In his 23-page ruling filed late Wednesday, Bruns detailed the evidence that showed Blahnik, who, by his own admission, repeatedly stabbed Bagley, 31, of Walker, on Dec. 14, 2018

Credible evidence

The testimony and evidence at trial established that Andrew Shaw, a drug dealer Bagley had previously robbed and assaulted, wanted Bagley dead. Credible evidence showed that Shaw, who has not been charged in Bagley’s death, asked Blahnik to kill Bagley, Bruns ruled.

Credible evidence also showed that Blahnik went looking for Bagley, the judge stated in his ruling.

Video evidence showed Blahnik and Drew Wagner, also convicted in this case, driving by a trailer where Paul Hoff lived and where the killing happened but not stopping.

This wasn’t consistent with someone wanting to buy drugs, which is the reason Blahnik claimed for going to Hoff’s trailer. But it was consistent with Blahnik and Wagner looking for Bagley and not realizing he was there because they didn’t see his vehicle.

Later on Dec. 14, Wagner called Hoff, who said Bagley was at his trailer, which prompted Blahnik and Wagner to go to Hoff’s trailer.

Wagner testified the plan was to confront Bagley about the robberies and then assault or kill him. Wagner accompanied Blahnik to make sure Hoff didn’t intervene.

Within minutes of Blahnik and Wagner arriving, Blahnik stabbed Bagley, the judge wrote, and Bagley’s body was wrapped in plastic or a tarp and loaded into Wagner’s truck. Wagner and Blahnik then went back to Wagner’s house in southeast Cedar Rapids to bury the body, which authorities found March 1, 2019.

No justification

Unless the jury found Blahnik’s actions were justified, the weight of the evidence presented at trial supported a second-degree murder conviction, Bruns wrote.

Blahnik stabbed Bagley “so many times and with such ferocity that the force was not reasonable,” Bruns wrote in detailing the “multiple ways” the evidence showed the killing was not justified.

As part of the plan, Wagner initially provided the use of force as an excuse for him and Blahnik to injure Bagley. And Blahnik and Wagner intentionally destroyed or concealed evidence relating to Blahnik’s use of deadly force.

Bruns also stated Blahnik’s statements to investigators were inconsistent and “clearly self-serving.” Blahnik claimed he had nothing to do with burying Bagley’s body and didn’t report the death because he was fearful of Hoff hurting him — which Bruns said was “clearly fabricated.”

Blahnik also continued to deny he knew anything about what had happened to Bagley long after Hoff was already in federal custody.

Blahnik’s attorneys had argued there was insufficient evidence that Blahnik moved the body and obstructed prosecution because the evidence only consisted of claims made by co-conspirators Wagner and Hoff.

Bruns ruled that Hoff and Wagner testified that Blahnik took part in moving the body. The jury could have found that moving the body was part of efforts to hide it after the murder and to conceal the murder itself to prevent prosecution. The body also was buried, which was undisputed, and Wagner testified that Blahnik helped bury the body.

Blahnik also failed to report the murder to authorities, Bruns said in the ruling. He falsely denied any knowledge of what happened to Bagley for a long period of time when interviewed by police.

That denial — along with claiming he failed to come forward because Hoff was threatening him, even after Hoff was in custody, — “clearly supported the other evidence that he had obstructed prosecution,” Bruns stated.

A conspiracy

Bruns said security video provided further corroboration that Bagley was not killed “in the heat of the moment” and that there had been a conspiracy, a plan, to take his life.

Within minutes of arriving at the trailer, Blahnik killed Bagley. Those in the trailer then wrapped Bagley’s body in tarp and shoved it out a trailer window into the back of Wagner’s truck.

The timing wasn’t consistent with a claim that a plan to remove the body was made after Blahnik killed Bagley in defense of Wagner or himself, Bruns said in the ruling. How the body was moved wasn’t consistent with a last-minute plan hatched when the “initial panic subsided.”

Jury instruction

Blahnik’s attorneys, in their motion for a new trial, also had argued the judge should not have given the jury an Allen instruction — urging it to reach a decision — when the jury sent a note to the judge saying it was deadlocked.

Bruns said the notes indicated the jury was deadlocked 11 to 1 and, according to the notes, the 11 jurors believed the one juror wasn’t following the court’s jury instructions.

The actual disagreement between the jurors wasn’t completely clear, except it seemed to be regarding the justification defense. The court didn’t attempt to solicit any information from the jury and didn’t take any side in the disagreement. The jury was asked to continue deliberations to reach a unanimous verdict.

The court researched the circumstances under which a verdict- urging instruction has been given but couldn’t find any cases with circumstances similar to this one, Bruns said in his ruling.

After both formal and informal discussion with the prosecution and defense, the court used an instruction previously approved by the appellate courts.

Bruns submitted the instruction as an answer to the jury note indicating the jurors didn’t believe further deliberations would be “fruitful.”

He thought doing it in that way, the instruction would be less likely to cause one juror to view it as an attempt to pressure him or her into changing their position.

The verdict-urging instruction was given about 3½ hours before the jury reached a verdict, Bruns said in the ruling. The court doesn’t know whether the one juror changed his/her view, the other jurors changed their view, or whether all the jurors reached some common ground.

Bruns said the fact that the jury deliberated over three hours is a “strong indication that the charge itself did not cause the one juror to change his/her stance.” The court did not err in giving the instruction, and the instruction didn’t improperly coerce or help coerce a verdict, he said.

Jury bias

Bruns determined Blahnik’s claim of jury bias, which was argued last Friday during a hearing, was “devoid of merit.”

Blahnik’s attorneys claimed juror Dane Harris had connections to both Blahnik and Bagley, which he failed to disclose during jury selection.

But that claim wasn’t supported by credible evidence, Bruns said in the ruling. Blahnik’s “bombshell” witness was supposed to be bartender Alysha Cornelius, but she said she didn’t know whether Harris knew Bagley or Blahnik and that Harris had never told her that.

Testimony from Peggy Blahnik — about what Cornelius told her — was hearsay, Bruns stated, though he allowed it so the defense could have it in the record for appeal.

Harris also testified he didn’t know Bagley and Blahnik.

Bruns noted that Cornelius, under oath, would not admit that Harris had made a statement about knowing Bagley and Blahnik, and she had refused to sign an affidavit, created by Blahnik’s defense, which attributed the statement to her.

“This is a very strong indicator that even if she previously made the statement to Peggy Blahnik, it was not reliable evidence,” Bruns said.

Bruns also dismissed the defense’s argument that because Blahnik and Bagley lived in a Marion apartment, at different times, near the bar where Harris worked showed Harris likely would have seen the two of them in the bar at some time.

But the defense had no evidence to back that up, Bruns ruled.

Comments: (319) 398-8318; trish.mehaffey@thegazette.com