Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

282 Minn. 523

162 N.W.2d 369

State v. Tamminen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 1, 1968

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1968-11-01

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 1989

7 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial court level by petition for post-conviction relief * * *.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Newcombe

Relies on State v. Gilles

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1968-11-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a guilty plea on an information charging attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. He now claims that he was wrongfully induced to enter a plea of *524 guilty because of fear that evidence obtained by an invalid search and seizure might be used against him in a trial, an illegally obtained confession, and statements of his counsel that he would receive a much more serious sentence if he were tried and found guilty.

¶2 As in State v. Gilles, 279 Minn. 363, 157 N. W. (2d) 64, the claims of the defendant are wholly devoid of any support in the record covering proceedings at the time of his entry of plea and sentencing. This is another case in which the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial-court level by petition for postconviction relief pursuant to the Post-conviction Remedy Act, L. 1967, c. 336, Minn. St. c. 590.

¶3 Affirmed.

/282/minn/523 · .json · Public domain