Published: October 27th 2026.
BURNSVILLE, MN - A 37-year-old Hastings man has been sentenced to jail and three years of supervised probation after a Dakota County jury found him guilty of two counts of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct involving two teenage girls at a Burnsville restaurant in September 2025.
Donnell Ishmel Singleton was sentenced Monday, October 26, 2026, in Dakota County District Court after being convicted of two gross misdemeanor offenses stemming from an incident on September 27, 2025. According to the criminal complaint, Singleton was working as a server when he inappropriately touched two girls, ages 16 and 17, while posing for a group photograph at the restaurant.
The case involved two separate jury trials. The first ended in a mistrial in January 2026 after jurors could not reach a verdict. A second jury subsequently found Singleton guilty on both counts in February. Following his convictions, Singleton challenged the jury's verdict and sought additional relief from the court, leading to further proceedings before his October sentencing.
Incident Reported at Burnsville Restaurant
According to the criminal complaint, Burnsville police officers responded to a report of criminal sexual conduct at a restaurant on September 27, 2025. Court testimony later identified the restaurant as Chili's in Burnsville, where Singleton was working as a server.
Officers met with two teenage girls, ages 17 and 16, outside a nearby store after they reported being touched inappropriately by their server. The 17-year-old told investigators that she, the 16-year-old, and several friends had been dining at the restaurant that evening. She described Singleton as friendly throughout their visit and said she had not initially noticed anything concerning about his behavior.
At the end of the evening, the group decided to take photographs together. According to the complaint, Singleton asked to participate in one of the pictures, and another restaurant employee took the photograph. Singleton positioned himself between the two girls.
The 17-year-old reported feeling Singleton's hand move down her back before he grabbed her buttocks. She initially believed the contact had come from her 16-year-old friend, but the younger girl denied touching her and indicated that Singleton had done the same thing to her. The older girl told investigators she froze when it happened. Describing the alleged contact to police, she stated, "he was just squeezing like there's no tomorrow."
The 16-year-old provided a similar account. She told officers Singleton moved his hand from the small of her back down to her buttocks while the photograph was being taken. She reported that he moved his hand around before squeezing her. She also said she froze during the incident and did not know how to respond.
Both girls reported that the touching occurred without their consent.
Singleton Arrested, Denies Allegations
Officers subsequently located Singleton inside the restaurant and took him into custody. According to the complaint, officers advised Singleton of his Miranda rights, and he provided a statement to investigators.
During that interview, he denied touching either girl in a sexual manner. Instead, Singleton claimed he bumped into the girls while opening a door as they took the photograph. Prosecutors later charged him with two counts of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct involving nonconsensual sexual contact, one count for each victim.
Both offenses were classified as gross misdemeanors under Minnesota Statute 609.3451, subdivision 1a(1), carrying a maximum possible punishment of one year in jail and a $3,000 fine per count.
First Jury Trial Ends in Mistrial
Singleton's case initially proceeded to a jury trial in January 2026 before Dakota County District Judge Kelly A. Staples. During that trial, Singleton testified in his own defense on January 23, 2026.
According to a transcript of his testimony, Singleton told the jury he had worked two restaurant jobs on the day of the incident, beginning at Lucky's 13 in Burnsville before reporting to Chili's for an evening shift. He acknowledged serving the group of teenagers but disputed the allegations of inappropriate touching. Singleton also discussed his history of stuttering and explained that anxiety, stress, and feeling misunderstood could make his speech difficulties more pronounced. He described the criminal proceedings and his interactions with investigators as stressful.
The first trial ultimately ended without a verdict.
According to an April 21, 2026, court order, the jury became deadlocked, and one juror failed to return for further deliberations before the jury could reach a verdict. Judge Staples declared a mistrial on January 26, 2026.
A mistrial does not constitute an acquittal or conviction. Because the jury did not reach a verdict, prosecutors could proceed with another trial.
Second Jury Finds Singleton Guilty on Both Counts
A second jury trial was held February 17–20, 2026. During the proceedings, prosecutors presented testimony from the two victims, two additional teenagers who were present at the restaurant, other witnesses, and Burnsville police officers involved in the investigation. Jurors also reviewed a photograph taken during the incident and recorded statements investigators provided. The photograph showed Singleton standing closely with four teenagers near the restaurant's entrance.
According to the court's subsequent findings, the jury heard evidence about Singleton's interactions with the teenagers before the photograph was taken, along with testimony describing the alleged touching. The two victims testified about their experiences, while the other teenagers provided accounts of what they observed. Two witnesses testified that they had placed their own arms around the girls' lower backs during the photograph but did not feel Singleton's arm or hand.
That testimony became an important part of Singleton's defense, which challenged whether the touching described by the victims could have occurred as alleged. Prosecutors also introduced recorded statements from the victims and testimony from officers who responded to the incident. Singleton again testified in his defense.
Following deliberations, the jury returned guilty verdicts on both counts of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct. The jury reached the verdicts on February 19 and filed them with the court on February 20, 2026.
Defense Challenges Convictions and Requests New Trial
Following the guilty verdicts, Singleton's attorney, Alexander Vian, filed motions requesting a judgment of acquittal or, alternatively, a new trial. The defense argued that several issues during the second trial had prevented Singleton from receiving a fair proceeding.
Concerns included witness and spectator conduct, the admission of certain evidence, statements made during closing arguments, and whether the evidence sufficiently supported the convictions. One issue involved a teenage witness who made an emotional statement after leaving the witness stand.
The defense also raised concerns about a courtroom spectator who reportedly hugged several teenage witnesses after their testimony while jurors were present. Singleton's attorneys argued that these incidents could have improperly influenced jurors.
Another central argument concerned the physical positioning of the individuals in the photograph. The defense maintained that testimony from two other teenagers created questions about whether Singleton could have touched both victims without those witnesses noticing. Additionally, the defense challenged the admission of statements the victims had previously made to police and other witnesses, arguing that portions of the testimony were unnecessarily repetitive or prejudicial.
Prosecutors Oppose Requests for Acquittal or New Trial
In a March 19, 2026, memorandum, the Dakota County Attorney's Office opposed Singleton's requests. Prosecutors argued that the jury had received sufficient evidence to support the convictions and that the alleged irregularities did not justify overturning the verdicts.
The state maintained that the testimony from the victims and other witnesses, together with the photograph and recorded statements, provided evidence supporting the jury's conclusions.
Prosecutors also argued that the courtroom spectator was legally permitted to attend the public proceedings and that the witness's emotional conduct did not establish sufficient prejudice to warrant another trial.
Judge Rejects Defense Motions, Upholds Convictions
On April 21, 2026, Judge Staples issued a 20-page order denying both the motion for judgment of acquittal and the request for a new trial. The judge concluded that the evidence presented during the February trial was sufficient to support the jury's findings.
In reviewing the evidence, the court distinguished between direct evidence that the touching occurred and circumstantial evidence concerning Singleton's intent. The judge found that the victims' testimony provided direct evidence of intentional touching without consent.
The court also determined that the circumstances surrounding the photograph, the victims' accounts, and other testimony allowed jurors to reasonably conclude that Singleton acted with sexual or aggressive intent. Although the defense identified discrepancies between witness accounts, the court emphasized that the jury was responsible for determining witness credibility.
Court Acknowledges Trial Irregularities
Judge Staples acknowledged that the second trial had problems. The court found that certain witness and spectator conduct was inappropriate and that some language the prosecutor used during closing arguments could have been better chosen. However, the judge determined that those issues did not undermine the trial's fairness or create a reasonable possibility that the outcome would have been different.
In its written findings, the court stated that the irregularities were not sufficiently serious or prejudicial to justify another trial. The judge also rejected Singleton's argument that the individuals' physical positioning in the photograph made the victims' accounts impossible.
The court concluded that the jury could reasonably have believed the victims' testimony while also accepting the other witnesses' accounts. With both post-trial motions denied, the guilty verdicts stood.
Singleton Sentenced to Jail and Three Years of Probation
On Monday, October 26, 2026, Singleton appeared for sentencing in Dakota County District Court. According to the sentencing order, the court imposed the following penalties for each of the two gross misdemeanor convictions:
Because the sentences run concurrently, Singleton must serve 60 days in the Dakota County Jail, not 120 days, with four days of credit for time already served. The court also imposed 364-day stayed sentences on both counts. These are separate from the 60-day jail terms and may become relevant if Singleton violates the conditions of his sentence. The court ordered his jail term to begin October 26, 2026.
Probation Includes Treatment and Restrictions Involving Minors
As part of the sentencing order, Singleton was placed on supervised probation for three years under Dakota County Community Corrections. His probation conditions include:
Completing chemical dependency and psychiatric evaluations and following treatment recommendations.
Attending a sex offender treatment program and paying the associated costs.
Participating in individual therapy and required aftercare.
Taking prescribed medications as directed.
Having no contact with either victim.
Having no contact with female minors, excluding family members, without prior authorization from his supervising agent.
Submitting to polygraph examinations when directed.
Cooperating with searches conducted under his probation officer's supervision.
Remaining law-abiding and reporting changes in employment, residence, or law enforcement contact as required.
The court also reserved the issue of restitution for 60 days, allowing additional time to address potential financial claims. The sentencing order lists a $15 law library fee on Count 1, while certain other court fees were waived.
Case Concludes More Than a Year After Incident
Singleton's sentencing came approximately 13 months after the September 27, 2025, incident at the Burnsville restaurant. The case included an initial jury trial that ended in a mistrial, a second trial resulting in two guilty verdicts, and subsequent defense motions challenging those convictions.
Following the April ruling denying Singleton's post-trial motions, the case proceeded to sentencing in October. Singleton now faces a 60-day jail term and three years of supervised probation, including treatment requirements and restrictions on contact with the victims and female minors. The convictions remain in effect under the October 26 sentencing order.
Pictured: Donnell Ishmel Singleton. Provided by Dakota County Jail.
Court records: State of Minnesota v. Donnell Ishmel Singleton, Dakota County District Court. This report is based on the criminal complaint, trial transcript, jury verdicts, post-trial motions, judicial findings, sentencing order, and case correspondence. Limitless Media News has withheld the identities of the victims, who were minors at the time of the incident.
Written by: Will Wight.
