Derek Chauvin asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals to pause his current appeal so his lawyers can return to trial court with a new challenge to his murder conviction in George Floyd’s death. The motion filed on Tuesday makes this his third petition for conviction relief.
Chauvin was convicted in April 2021 of the 2020 murder of George Floyd, after records show he kneeled on Floyd’s neck for nine minutes and 29 seconds while Floyd was face down and handcuffed on the ground. Floyd died from a fatal lack of oxygen to the brain.
Tuesday filing to the court
The filing asks the Minnesota Court of Appeals to stop the existing appeal long enough for Chauvin to pursue a new claim in the local trial court. His lawyers said the case should go back because he wants to argue that the original charges were unlawfully brought against him.
The motion said that Mr. Chauvin became aware of additional violations of Mr. Chauvin’s due process rights in the unlawful assignment of authority by Governor Tim Walz to Attorney General Keith Ellison to prosecute State v. Chauvin.
May 1 denial in Hennepin County District Court
The request follows the judge’s May 1 denial of Chauvin’s entire post-conviction petition. Back in June, Chauvin’s team filed an appeal of that ruling, keeping the challenge alive while the new petition was filed in November 2025.
That sequence leaves the appeals court with a narrow procedural question: whether to let the current appeal move forward now or hold it while Chauvin presses the new attack on the validity of the prosecution itself.
State v. Chauvin appeal
For Chauvin, the practical issue is whether the appeal pauses and the case returns to the trial court before any review of the denied post-conviction petition moves ahead. For the court, the filing turns on whether the new due process claim belongs in a new round of trial-court litigation or in the appeal already underway.
George Floyd’s death remains the center of the case, and Chauvin’s latest filing keeps the conviction in active litigation instead of letting the appeal run on its own track.
