The attorney for the Minot woman accused of murdering Anita Knutson in 2007 has filed their written arguments in support of a motion to dismiss the case before it goes to trial next summer.

Nichole Rice, 35, Minot, was arrested for the murder of then roommate Knutson in March 2022, and was formally arraigned at a preliminary hearing held in September the same year. However, a filing made by Rice’s attorneys from the Sand Law Firm a little more than a year later raised serious concerns with testimony regarding DNA evidence elicited at the preliminary hearing to establish probable cause by the state. The defense contends the testimony was “false and should not be relied upon.”

In the post-hearing brief filed in North Central District Court, attorney Philip Becher summarized his arguments and testimony presented at the hearing held on Nov. 17 from the defense’s DNA expert Monte Miller and forensic scientist Amy Gebhardt from the State Crime Lab. Becher argued in his brief that both Miller’s and Gebhardt’s testimonies were “clear cut,” that the testimony from former Minot Police Detective Mikali Talbott “was false and has no basis of support in any of the reports which were previously filed for the Court’s consideration.”

Talbott’s testimony introduced an assertion that Rice’s DNA profile was the only one that “could not be excluded,” from an analysis of the murder weapon, establishing her as a suspect in Knutson’s murder. However, Becher stated both experts testified it was not supported by any DNA analysis reports entered as exhibits for the case. Becher also cited Gebhardt’s testimony, saying Talbott’s testimony would have been “erroneous” if it was made based on inconclusive results.

Becher further stated that based on the experts’ testimonies, Talbott made her assertion “intentionally and/or recklessly,” due to a lack of basis for such a significant understanding of the results and her own testimony regarding her training and experience.

Becher also rejected Ward County Deputy State’s Attorney Tiffany Sorgen’s arguments that the state had provided sufficient evidence to show probable cause even without the DNA evidence, saying, “Much of the supposed evidence that the state is relying on amounts to nothing more than petty gossip and speculation and certainly does not provide an adequate basis for the finding of probable cause in a murder case.”

In addition to the lack of probable cause, Becher argued that deterrence was another critical factor in support of the dismissal of the murder charge against his client, calling Talbott’s erroneous testimony “egregious” in light of the information that was available to her at the time.

“If the Court permits this matter to move forward with this kind of case history, a dangerous precedent will be set that a witness for the state is able (to) testify falsely and there will be no repercussions when the falsity is later discovered,” Becher concluded. “Such a precedential effect can only be strengthened by how clear it is that Talbott testified falsely, the critical nature of what she testified falsely to, and the fact what is at issue is a charge of Felony AA murder.”

State prosecutors now have 10 days to file a brief in response before the question is ruled on by District Judge Richard Hagar. Barring a dismissal of the charge, Rice’s trial is scheduled to run for three weeks from July 15 through Aug. 2.