Minnesota state senator found guilty of burglary announces resignation
Minnesota state Sen. Nicole Mitchell was found guilty of two criminal charges on July 18 stemming from a 2024 arrest, The Minnesota Reporter, part of the USA TODAY Network, reported.
Mitchell, 50, was convicted of first-degree burglary and possession of burglary tools in connection to a break-in at her stepmother's home in Detroit Lakes, a city in northeast Minnesota about 200 miles northwest of Minneapolis.
On July 22, Mitchell's attorney Dane DeKrey told USA TODAY his client will resign "no later than Aug. 4."
In the interim, DeKrey said the senator will use that time to wrap up outstanding legislative projects, train legislation staff and more.
"Senator Mitchell's constituents deserve for her legislative projects to be finalized or ready to hand off to her successor before she resigns," according to a statement released by Dekray. "Mitchell's constituents also deserve to have their outstanding issues handled before her resignation... It was the honor of her lifetime to serve her District and the State of Minnesota."
Who is Sen. Nicole Mitchell?
Mitchell, a Democrat, represents the cities of Woodbury and Maplewood.
She is a former Lt. Colonel with the U.S. Air Force and a meteorologist.
More political news: 'Flood' of ICE agents is coming to cities run by Democrats, according to the White House
Why was Sen. Nicole Mitchell arrested?
According to trial testimony, on April 22, 2024, Mitchell broke into her stepmother's Detroit Lakes home to steal her late father's possessions.
Mitchell unsuccessfully tried to convince jurors she was in the home to conduct a welfare check on her stepmother. She took the stand during trial and told the jury her stepmother "was struggling with paranoia due to Alzheimer's disease," the USA TODAY Network reported.
As of July 22, sentencing for Mitchell had not been set.
The lawmaker, who has no criminal history, faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for burglary and three years in prison for her other charge.
Mitchell's attorney said his client will appeal the burglary conviction.
Contributing: Michelle Griffith with The Minnesota Reformer
Natalie Neysa Alund is a senior reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at nalund@usatoday.com and follow her on X @nataliealund.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
13 minutes ago
- USA Today
FBI ousts more top leaders who investigated President Donald Trump, reports say
WASHINGTON – The Trump administration is continuing its purge of top FBI officials: One former acting director and other senior leaders have reportedly been forced out of the nation's premier federal law enforcement agency. One of those ousted, media reports say, was Brian Driscoll, the former acting FBI director who refused to carry out Trump administration orders to identify and potentially fire FBI agents who had investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. That probe also looked into President Donald Trump's potential role in the assault as he sought to stay in office after his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. More: Senate Democrat: Kash Patel 'may have committed perjury' denying link to FBI purge Another top official forced out was Steve Jensen, who has been head of the FBI's Washington, D.C., field office, one of its largest. In an Aug. 7 letter to colleagues, disclosed by MSNBC, Jensen said he was informed the night before 'that my employment with the FBI will be terminated effective tomorrow, August 8, 2025.' Both men sent messages to their colleagues saying they had been notified late Aug. 6 that Friday, Aug. 8, would be their last day in the bureau, according to MSNBC, which posted what it said were parts of the messages. 'I understand that you may have a lot of questions regarding why, for which I currently have no answers,' Driscoll said of his ouster in his note, MSNBC said. 'No cause has been articulated at this time. Please know that it has been the honor of my life to serve alongside each of you.' Driscoll was named acting director in January to replace Christopher Wray and served while FBI Director Kash Patel was going through the Senate confirmation process. He made headlines for resisting Trump administration demands to turn over the names of agents from around the country who participated in the sprawling Jan. 6 investigations as part of an effort to fire or force them out of bureau. 'Our collective sacrifices for those we serve is, and will always be, worth it,' Driscoll also said in his farewell note, MSNBC reported. 'I regret nothing.' Driscoll, a veteran counterterrorism agent, had recently led the bureau's Hostage Rescue Team and served as acting director in charge of the Critical Incident Response Group, which responds to fast-moving crisis situations. Also forced out were special agents Walter Giardina and Christopher Meyer, both of whom had worked on FBI cases involving Trump, the New York Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The Times said that Giardina's wife died last month of cancer, and that he worked on a case that sent Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro to prison. USA TODAY was unable to independently confirm the personnel actions. The FBI declined to comment when asked about the reported ousters, which follow other high-profile personnel purges in recent months under Patel and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino. The FBI under Trump has moved to aggressively demote, reassign or push out many agents from their positions at FBI headquarters and field offices throughout the U.S., despite Patel's claims that he would not politicize the department. Asked if he would go after FBI officials and agents at his January confirmation hearing, Patel promised there would be 'no politicization' or retribution at the FBI under his watch. "Senator, my answer is simply I would never do anything unconstitutional or unlawful, and I never have in my 16 years of government service," Patel said. Soon after, a key Senate Democrat said Patel 'may have committed perjury' in testifying that he didn't know about the purge of FBI top officials that had already begun. 'I hope that what I reveal today from credible whistleblowers at the highest levels will give my Republican colleagues some pause before it's too late,' said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. Patel was confirmed along party lines. Another veteran FBI agent, Michael Feinberg, has gone public to say he was told to resign or accept a demotion amid scrutiny of his friendship with a lead agent on the FBI's long-running Trump-Russia investigation, which looked at Kremlin interference in the 2016 election. Other agents at headquarters and field offices have been forced out, demoted or reassigned after being linked to investigations that touched on Trump. More: FBI staff ordered to reveal their role in Jan. 6 investigations by Monday The FBI Agents Association said it was 'deeply concerned by reports that FBI Special Agents − case agents and senior leaders alike − are going to be summarily fired without due process for doing their jobs investigating potential federal crimes.' 'Agents are not given the option to pick and choose their cases, and these Agents carried out their assignments with professionalism and integrity,' the association said in a statement. 'Most importantly, they followed the law.' The agents association said there is supposed to be a review process that takes place when employment actions are taken against agents, and that it was 'established so that the FBI could remain independent and apolitical.' 'FBI leadership committed − both publicly and directly to FBIAA − that they would abide by that process. We urge them to honor that commitment and follow the law.'The agents association said it was 'actively reviewing all legal options to defend our members.'
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas Democrat decries rhetoric over quorum break: ‘Words have consequences'
One of the Texas Democrats who fled her state over a GOP plan to draw new state House district lines said rhetoric from the right is putting a 'dangerous target' on state lawmakers' backs. 'I'm terrified at the rhetoric coming from both my colleagues, the governor, the attorney general and the president. It's putting a dangerous target on our backs,' Democratic state Rep. Mary Gonzalez said on a call with reporters. 'Words have consequences. And in a moment in time like right now, when you're saying 'Hunt them down. Here's [their] location. Go get them,' what do they think is going to happen?' More than 50 Texas Democratic state legislators broke quorum over the weekend, depriving the state House of the numbers it needs to move forward with a redistricting proposal backed by President Trump. The Democrats fanned out to blue strongholds, including Illinois and New York, to try and wait out the ongoing 30-day special session in the Lone Star State. But Republican Sen. John Cornyn (Texas) announced on Thursday that the FBI had approved his request to help law enforcement locate and arrest the quorum-breaking Democrats. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) later said that the FBI is 'tracking down the derelict Democrats,' who would be taken to the Texas Capitol. Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) has said 'we should use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law.' The participating Democrats each face a $500-a-day fine, as well as potential removal and Abbott's threat of bribery charges. 'Fifty very different people from very different parts of the state said we have to at least stand up and put our livelihood at risk – the $500 a day fine is not a joke – to put our seats at risk, to put our health and safety at risk, to put our families … everything we have at risk. I'm just proud we did that,' Gonzalez said. Gonzalez made her comments on a call with other Texas Democrats who blasted Republicans for focusing on redistricting instead of aid after devastating floods hit Texas last month, hitting back at GOP arguments that Democrats' quorum break is stalling aid progress. 'We have spent an astronomical amount of time on racial illegal gerrymandering and redistricting that absolutely is going to allow politicians to pick their people instead of the other way around,' said Democratic state Sen. Molly Cook.
Vox
14 minutes ago
- Vox
The Texas gerrymandering showdown is about to get even messier
Democracy's a pretty simple concept: Voters vote for a politician, the politician with the most votes wins, and that politician then represents voters as an elected official. That's the idea anyway, right? But what if — just what if — instead of voters picking politicians, politicians instead could choose their own voters? And basically guarantee their own outcomes? That's what's at play in Texas. Facing such a situation, Texas Democratic lawmakers fled the state Sunday to block passage of a new congressional map designed to regroup Texas voters to all but guarantee the GOP five additional seats in the US House of Representatives next year. Republicans currently have a seven-seat advantage. It's a move that has set off a national fight over redistricting ahead of 2026's midterm elections. Facing a potentially difficult cycle for Republicans, President Donald Trump demanded Texas remake its maps to boost Republicans' chances of holding — and expanding — their slim majority in Congress. Texas Democrats have condemned the new maps as a political power grab; their flight from the state prevents the legislature from having enough votes to function. Gov. Gregg Abbott and Republican state lawmakers have since threatened Democrats with arrest and declaring their seats vacant. US Sen. John Cornyn is seeking to enlist the FBI to find Texas lawmakers who have left the state. Things are messy and only getting messier. To understand the showdown in Texas — and its stakes for the rest of the country — Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with Texas Tribune's Eleanor Klibanoff. Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There's much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. Eleanor Klibanoff: So this is something we started hearing about a couple of weeks ago. We heard that President Trump was asking Texas to consider redrawing its congressional maps to strengthen the GOP majority in the House ahead of the 2026 election. The Texas House has a proposed redraw of the map that tears up a bunch of districts in the Dallas area, the Houston area, the Austin area, as well as the Rio Grande Valley. And based on our initial analysis, it looks like if the 2026 midterms go the way the 2024 election went, they will get five additional seats out of this map. The [Texas] House committee on redistricting held several hearings. … A thousand people showed up in Houston. People submitted comments. They were waiting hours and hours to testify. The committee votes the map out [for a full legislature vote] on Saturday. On Sunday, they set [that vote] on the calendar for Monday. And Sunday afternoon, the Democrats skip town. Where did they go?! Most of them went to Chicago — well, actually, most of them went to the suburbs of Chicago. My colleague who agreed to go out when she thought it was Chicago was disappointed to learn that they were in St. Charles, Illinois, well outside Chicago. So they went there, where they've gotten a lot of support from Gov. [J.B.] Pritzker. Others went to New York, where the governor there has said they will look at redistricting. Some went to Massachusetts. [They are] just sort of fanning out to these Democratic strongholds, essentially. Do they have to go there because, what, a Republican governor could extradite them back to Texas? Yes, essentially, they have to leave the state. The [state] House of Representatives, in their absence, voted to issue arrest warrants for them that basically say: We will send state troopers to your house or we'll try to track you down. If we find you, we will bring you to the Capitol, and then you cannot leave. These are not criminal arrest warrants. It doesn't go on their record, but it's to go find them and bring them [back]. But these warrants only extend to state lines. So they have to leave the state for fear that they will be brought back. Of course, there is a federal police force. I believe it's called the FBI, and the latest news is that the FBI might actually get involved here. Certainly, there has been some chatter about that. Our sitting Senator John Cornyn has asked for the FBI to get involved. President Trump sort of alluded to maybe that being necessary. That would be an extraordinary step if that were to happen. I'm willing to believe that by the time this airs, it may have happened. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, but Texas is a state that pretty proudly likes to manage its own business itself and keep the federal government out of its affairs. So it would be quite the reversal to allow the federal government to arrest its lawmakers and bring them back to Texas. This is obviously an extreme moment for Texas politics, but it's also not an unprecedented one. As I recall, Texas Democrats have fled the state before, right? Can you remind us under what circumstances and how it ended? Recently, they left the state in 2021, to protest a bill that would have further restricted voting access. That was during the Biden administration, kind of a different vibe in DC. They stuck it out there. They burned through one special session, but when the second special session was called, they did end up returning, and ultimately it did pass. And then in 2003, they left the state to do a quorum break on this exact issue, which is a mid-decade redistricting. So there is precedent for this to happen. I think what's unprecedented about this is A) the pressure for the legislation that they're protesting is coming from the federal government, and B) the way Texas Republican leaders are responding with this very — usually they just kind of wait it out, and eventually the quorum break breaks, and that is not how this is going. How did it go back in 2003 when almost the same thing happened? Eventually, the quorum break broke, and they came back and they passed the maps, and that was the beginning of Republican dominance in Texas. The reason they did mid-decade redistricting in 2003 at all was because [Republicans] had just won the [state] House and the Senate for the first time. So they took the opportunity, redrew maps that benefited them, and from there on out, we have seen basically unfettered Republican dominance in Texas. So the Democrats who just fled and are in Chicago and other spots… Yes. …the Chicago suburbs, we should note. They know that the last time they gave in on this issue, they forever altered their chances of dominating Texas politics. Does that mean they're going to hold out longer this time? Does that mean it's going to get uglier this time? If history is any guide, they leave, eventually they come back, and what was going to happen happens. I think they don't like this narrative that it's inevitable. If you just wait 'em out, they'll come back. It is also just reality, right?These people have jobs they have to go to, and they have kids. I mean, school starts here soon. Are you going to miss the first day of school? Some of them brought their kids with them. Hm. And now you're basically a fugitive from your home state. Texas is a part-time legislature. You make $600 a month, you can't feed your family and leave your company behind or your business or whatever. So there are just realities. And the truth is [Republicans] don't need all of them to break the quorum break. You know, just in the last day here, we've had this sort of escalation from Governor Abbott in which he has asked the Texas Supreme Court to vacate the seats of these members who have broken quorum, which is unprecedented, shocking to all the legal experts that I've talked to. So there's both sort of, within Texas, a constitutional crisis, and then of course these national democracy questions about who gets to decide when the rules are set and when you change the rules in the middle of the game. And then what happens? Republicans aren't necessarily guaranteed these five seats, but they'll probably get 'em? Right. So if the quorum break ends in one way or another, they absolutely will pass the map. We'll have the midterms in 2026. These districts seem very likely to go for Republicans based on 2024 performance. But 2024 was a pretty exceptional year in Texas, most notably that we saw Latino voters swing so far for President Trump compared to historical precedent. And a lot of these maps are based on the idea that those same voters will go for Republican candidates across the board in 2026. Now, President Trump is not on the ballot in 2026. It remains to be seen whether Latino voters are thinking, This is what I voted for and I love this, or if there's any buyer's remorse that might turn some of those seats a little bit more competitive than you would think. It's also not guaranteed that Donald Trump gets his five Republican districts, because now that Texas is going this route, governors like Gavin Newsom in California are threatening revenge. Right. We have basically a redistricting arms race afoot now, and you've got governors in California, New York, and Illinois saying, 'Maybe we'll take a look at our maps.' But then you also have President Trump saying, 'Well, then I'll get Missouri to take a look at their maps.' Now, suddenly, we are in a mess of a situation. You've got even some Republican lawmakers in Congress talking about legislation to basically say, 'we have to stop this before it gets on top of us.' Part of the reason why this is happening in Texas first is that we're very large, and so you can get five seats in a way that some states don't even have five seats [total]. But also, our filing deadline [for candidates to run] is very, very early, and so this is just sort of a testing ground in Texas. There's no reason to believe that with President Trump, five seats will be enough and that he will stop there versus trying to get other states to redistrict as well.
