Prosecutors Drop Assault Case Against Naval Academy Midshipman, Ending Nearly 3-Year Saga

Prosecutors dropped the assault case against midshipman Garrett Lee Holsen Wednesday, ending a nearly three-year legal saga that followed Holsen through most of his time at the Naval Academy and extended past his graduation.

In a statement, Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Anne Colt Leitess wrote she made “the difficult decision” to terminate the case because the alleged victim was not able to participate in a retrial scheduled at the end of this month

“It was my privilege to represent her in this case as she is one of the strongest and most resilient people I have met in my career,” Leitess said.

Defense attorneys Peter O’Neill and Megan Coleman have challenged the state’s decision to retry the 22-year-old after he was found not guilty of rape in 2022. Prosecutors accused Holsen of attacking one of his classmates at an off-campus party when she was too intoxicated to consent to sex — a theory the jury rejected.

Keeping in line with instructions from Anne Arundel Circuit Judge Robert Thompson, however, the jury did not issue verdicts on third-degree sex offense and second-degree assault charges. Prosecutors took the rare step of appealing that decision and in December, the Appellate Court of Maryland ruled Thompson had “acted without authority” before sending the two remaining charges back to the circuit court for a retrial.

Across several hearings this year, Leitess, and assistant prosecutors Sean Fox and Katherine Smeltzer, signaled their intent to move forward with the case, arguing the assault charge considered different factors than rape. The sex offense charge was dismissed in June because of double jeopardy, which bars a defendant from being tried twice for the same crime.

With that, Holsen was left facing a second-degree assault charge, a broad misdemeanor; trial was scheduled to begin on Aug. 29. But on Wednesday, the three prosecutors chose to dismiss the case before Anne Arundel Circuit Judge J. Michael Wachs.

O’Neill said the hearing was a “bittersweet moment” and that his client was “ecstatic …this nightmare is finally over.” However, he said the midshipman’s reputation has been “marred” for years by the accusations and that his military service, which was set to begin after his graduation earlier this year, has stalled.

Though he went to the Naval Academy, Holsen, a Wisconsin native, was working toward a commission as a Marine Corps officer. O’Neill said the corps has yet to authorize Holsen as a second lieutenant because of the case.

“The emotional trauma has been incalculable,” O’Neill said. “He is a strong man of good moral character who only wants to serve his country and put this tragic set of events behind him.”

“I appreciate the state’s decision to appeal,” he added. “However, it seems that the resources spent both at the appellate level and the trial level were unnecessary.”

According to the Maryland Judiciary, Smeltzer was brought onto the case shortly before Holsen’s initial trial in September 2022. Fox, who primarily handles sex crimes, was assigned to the retrial in March and Leitess, who rarely involves herself directly in trials, entered her appearance in June to challenge Thompson’s role in the renewed case.

In hearings and filings, Leitess argued the judge’s decision to dismiss the remaining charges in 2022 was the “functional equivalent” of an acquittal and that the state would not be able to receive a fair trial if he were to preside over it.

Thompson, who conceded his jury instructions in 2022 were a mistake, disagreed and ruled he would preside over the two-day retrial later this month.

Leitess attempted to push the trial to later in the year to accommodate vacation schedules and give her team enough time to subpoena witnesses, some of whom had already begun their military service. But O’Neill objected, claiming Thompson had already “bent over backwards” to accommodate the state and said Holsen’s right to a speedy trial trumped any scheduling conflict.

Leitess said Wednesday that she would have participated in the proceedings had they moved forward. Her involvement would have seen three attorneys attempt to prove a misdemeanor charge carrying a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.

©2024 Capital Gazette. Visit at capitalgazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Story Continues

© Copyright 2024 Capital Gazette. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

View original article

Scroll to Top