Introduction
The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the central guilty verdicts against Alex Nettestad, but it did not find the trial error-free. The court held that the district court improperly allowed the jury to see medical-record conclusions that child sexual abuse had occurred. It deemed that error harmless, rejected two other grounds for a new trial, and remanded to correct an included-offense conviction and the resulting sentence.
What the Court of Appeals decided
A jury found Nettestad guilty of three counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct involving his seven-year-old half-sister. On appeal, he raised four principal issues:
-
Medical-record conclusions: The jury received records stating “Child sexual abuse, confirmed,” along with a physician’s agreement. The Court of Appeals held that admitting those conclusions was an abuse of discretion. Medical witnesses may describe observations, findings, and appropriate medical opinions, but they may not answer the ultimate question of whether a sexual assault occurred. That determination belongs to the jury.
The error nevertheless did not warrant a new trial. The court found no reasonable possibility that the improper conclusions significantly affected the verdict. It emphasized the state’s limited use of the statements, the defense expert’s competing interpretation, and substantial other evidence—including Lerna’s testimony, her forensic interview, electronic communications, and properly admitted medical evidence.
-
Proposed impeachment evidence: The defense wanted to introduce evidence that Lerna had allegedly visited Fargo after Nettestad moved there, arguing that the trip undermined statements that she feared him. The appellate court concluded that the district court had not categorically excluded the evidence. Instead, the judge required an offer of proof and a foundation showing Lerna’s meaningful participation in the trip, and suggested how the defense might establish that foundation. The defense did not pursue the opportunity. The court therefore found no denial of Nettestad’s right to present a complete defense.
-
Prosecutor’s closing argument: Nettestad challenged repeated references comparing a seven-year-old child’s anatomy with an adult’s, as well as attacks on the defense expert as a paid witness. Because the defense did not object during trial, the remarks were reviewed under the modified plain-error standard. The Court of Appeals said the anatomy argument came “very close to the line,” but concluded that its context tied it to credibility and the disputed medical evidence rather than an improper appeal to emotion. It also found that comments about the expert’s compensation and research were grounded in his testimony and relevant to possible bias.
-
Included-offense conviction: The state agreed that count 3 was an included offense of count 1 because both rested on the same act. The Court of Appeals held that Minnesota law did not permit both convictions to be adjudicated and sentenced. It remanded for the count 3 conviction to be vacated and for resentencing. The guilty verdict itself remains in the record; the remand does not order a new trial.
Why Justice-Denied is watching
Nettestad comes from the same district court and judge involved in other matters examined by Justice-Denied. Its relevance is specific: the Court of Appeals identified a concrete evidentiary error, explained why that error did not justify a new trial, and ordered correction of a separate conviction-and-sentencing error.
Source
Minnesota Court of Appeals opinion in State v. Nettestad, A25-1141 (filed July 27, 2026).
