Former Auburn Police Officer Jeffrey Nelson will not receive a new murder trial or recusal of the court.

On Dec. 20, King County Superior Court Judge Nicole Gaines Phelps issued the ruling in the case for Nelson, who was the first police officer to be convicted of murder following the institution of Initiative 940, which changed the standard for holding police criminally liable for excessive use of force.

A jury in Junefound Nelson guilty of second-degree murder and first-degree assault with a deadly weapon following the May 2019 death of 26-year-old Jesse Sarey. After attempting to arrest Sarey, Nelson shot him once in the stomach and then once more in the forehead when he was on the ground. Sarey was the third person Nelson had killed as a K9 and patrol officer — the other two being 48-year-old Brian Scaman in May 2011 and Isaiah Obet in June 2017.

Judge Phelps said during the Dec. 20 ruling at the Maleng Regional Justice Center in Kent, that after reviewing the arguments of Nelson’s counsel for a new trial, the defense’s claims that there had been prosecutorial and judicial misconduct were not persuasive. Phelps said Nelson articulated three issues, which he argues warrant a new trial: prosecutorial misconduct, violation of his right to a public trial, and the manner in which the court addressed jury deliberations.

Regarding prosecutorial misconduct, Phelps said that Nelson could not provide a burden of proof that misconduct had occurred. Phelps said the state’s jury instructions were given correctly, and the court did not make comments on them on the record. Regarding a violation of his right to a public trial, Phelps said that the juror had spoken to her, another judge, and a sergeant about an incident with a security guard, but that this was outside of the court and was not pertinent to the trial.

“The legal standard is that a court may grant a new trial if only from the record, it affirmatively appears that there’s a substantial right of the defendant that has been materially affected, and a new trial is necessary only when the defendant has been so prejudiced that nothing short of a new trial can ensure that the defendant can be treated fairly,” Phelps said. “In doing so, the record has to contain something more than a mere possibility of prejudice.”

Regarding the recusal of Judge Phelps, she said that Nelson cited various reasons why the court should be recused, with one of the main ones being that he believed the court coerced the jury into making a decision during deliberations.

Phelps said Nelson argued that the court used the word “forms” instead of “form” when count two had been decided on, but Phelps said the court had not been aware of the decision at the time the word forms was used.

Another argument Nelson made was that the court withheld to the state and defense the jurors’ decision of guilty or not guilty regarding count two until count one had been decided on by jurors. Phelps said this was done because decisions need to be shared in open court before counsel can know.

“Having addressed defense’s motion for a new trial and having addressed the defensive motion for recusal and having found that defense does not legally establish a basis for either, the court is denying both motions,” Phelps said.

She said sentencing would be at 8:30 a.m. on Jan. 23, 2025 at the Maleng Regional Justice Center in Kent.

Jeffrey Nelson, at his hearing Dec. 20, listening to the judge decide whether there is a new trial and judge recusal. Photo by Joshua Solorzano/Sound Publishing

Jeffrey Nelson being taken back to jail after the judge ruled Dec. 20 there will be no new trial or judge recusal. Photo by Joshua Solorzano/Auburn Reporter