Murder defendant Bradley Joe Morales, 31, of Minot, represented himself in court Monday at a hearing to determine whether certain evidence in the case should be suppressed at his Aug. 9 re-trial.

Morales has been charged in district court in Minot with Class AA felony murder in the stabbing death of his ex-girlfriend at a Minot residence in August 2017.

Morales was previously tried and found guilty in May 2018 and Judge Doug Mattson subsequently sentenced him to 40 years in prison. However, the state supreme court later ordered that Morales must be given a new trial because it ruled that Mattson had violated Morales’s constitutional right to a public trial by closing the courtroom on different occasions without first considering alternatives.

Judge Mattson also agreed last month to allow Morales, who is not an attorney, to represent himself at the trial, with an appointed defense attorney on stand-by if he requires assistance. Morales has had disagreements with most of his previous attorneys and wanted control of how the case is presented. Some of his previous attorneys objected to the approach he wanted them to take and he asked to represent himself.

The hearing on Thursday was open to the public. A handful of people were in attendance at the hearing, among them a prosecutor and law enforcement officers. Mattson did say he would deny permission for Minot Police Department Sgt. Joshua Noyes to watch the hearing because Noyes is expected to testify at the trial in August, although Noyes had not been called to testify at Monday’s hearing. Mattson did allow others to remain in the gallery to view the proceedings.

Mattson also ensured that Morales’s rights were protected. Morales wanted his hands free so he would be able to take notes during the hearing and Mattson ordered correctional officers to return with Morales to the jail to put on a belt that would make it possible for him to move his hands to take notes but still enable the guards to keep him under control. Mattson allowed Morales some latitude in questioning witnesses at the hearing, but sustained some objections from the prosecution and ruled that Morales’s line of questioning was not pertinent to the matter that was under discussion.

Mattson also called for technical help when one of two television monitors in the courtroom did not show a video that was entered into evidence. He said it was an open hearing and he wanted to make sure the video evidence presented could be viewed. One monitor was positioned at the front of the courtroom and one was positioned on the left side of the courtroom. The video played was visible to all in the courtroom.

The upcoming August trial is scheduled for two weeks.