Mark Holm makes first appearance under new criminal complaint

By Rachel Kytonen

Mark Steven Holm, 54, of Stanchfield, made an appearance in 10th District Court on Monday, May 23, for five felony criminal sexual conduct charges and a gross misdemeanor charge of possession of obscene materials.

This was Holm’s first appearance under a new complaint filed March 31. Holm is the former director of East Central Minnesota Young Life charged with criminal sexual conduct involving a female participating in the youth program.

At the hearing May 23, Judge Tammi Fredrickson, who is based in Anoka County, ordered Holm to remain released on his own recognizance subject to the following conditions: GPS monitoring; stay a reasonable distance away from the victim’s residence; have no contact with the victim; have no contact with Cambridge-Isanti High School or Young Life; stay a reasonable distance away from the victim’s place of employment; have no contact with unrelated minor females; and remain law-abiding.

The case is being prosecuted by Andrew Johnson, an attorney with the Anoka County Attorney’s office, due to it being a conflict case for the Isanti County Attorney’s office. Holm is being represented by the 10th District Public Defender’s Office.

William Robyt, Holm’s managing attorney with the public defender’s office, said he objected to all the conditions of release.

“This case has a torturous procedural history,” Robyt said. “The county attorney’s office dismissed the original complaint outright and then filed a new complaint. My client has been out on release without any restrictions since that time.”

Robyt said his primary concern was the costs associated with GPS monitoring.

Holm said in court Monday that he is currently living with his sister in Cambridge.

Holm was charged Oct. 29, 2010, and pled not guilty in early January to three counts of felony 3rd degree criminal sexual conduct and was released from jail.

One additional charge of felony 3rd degree criminal sexual conduct, felony 4th degree criminal sexual conduct, and gross misdemeanor possession of obscene materials, were added to the March 31 complaint.

At the time, Isanti County Attorney Jeff Edblad said a new complaint was filed due to the three additional charges.

“Under the circumstances of further investigation, the dismissal of the original complaint and the refiling of a new complaint with the original charges, plus additional charges, is the cleanest way to proceed in my opinion,” Edblad said.

The complaint filed March 31 does not allege additional victims.

The new complaint alleges the offenses began in July 2010 and continued through October 2010. Locations of the alleged crimes were at the 17-year old victim’s residence; at Castaway Camp, a Young Life youth camp; in the Young Life office in Cambridge; and at Holm’s residence in Stanchfield.

The complaint also alleges the victim and Holm exchanged various nude photographs from the waist up via cell phone, and one completely nude photograph of Holm was sent to the victim.

Authorities were also particularly concerned about an alleged suicide pact between Holm and the victim.

The initial three, 3rd degree felony criminal sexual conduct charges against Holm are characterized as serious felonies.

Holm had been director of East Central Minnesota Young Life since 2004.

Holm’s next appearance in 10th District Court is scheduled for June 27 at 9 a.m. at the Isanti County Government Center in Cambridge.

 

  • observer

    Does anyone else get the feeling that Jeff Edblad doesn’t know what the heck he’s doing? If he had any competence, this case would have been tried and completed by now. And it would have been nice if the reporter had actually put a little effort into her coverage and explain why this is “a conflict case for the Isanti County Attorney’s office.” This article is basically a rehash of old news, with minimal new information. Slow news day?

  • curious

    Has anyone else noticed that all of the comments and ‘there’s no way he did it’ supporters have quieted down and disappeared?

  • Joe

    Why is this case taking so long to go to trial?

up arrow