Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

330 N.W.2d 458

State v. Wallace

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 4, 1983

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1983-03-04

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 2012

1 state decisions

Relies on State v. Knaffla · City of St. Paul v. Vaughn · State v. Duesterhoeft

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1983-03-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

TODD, Justice.

¶1Defendant was charged by indictment with the gross misdemeanor offense of obstructing legal process by force and with two misdemeanor offenses, driving after revocation and failure to yield to an emergency vehicle. He was tried in district court pursuant to Minn.R.Crim.P. 26.01, subd. 1(1)(a). A district court jury acquitted him of the gross misdemeanor charge but found him guilty of the other two charges. We granted permission to appeal because failure to do so would have left defendant without any chance to appeal his convictions.1 We affirm.

¶2Defendant raises four issues in his brief. The first is whether the police decision to stop him when he was riding his motorcycle was valid. Our decisions in State v. Duesterhoeft, 311 N.W.2d 866 (Minn.1981), and City of St. Paul v. Vaughn, 306 Minn. 337, 237 N.W.2d 365 (1975), control this issue. The other contentions concern two evidentiary rulings by the trial court and the trial court’s refusal to give a certain instruction requested by defense counsel. There is no merit to any of these contentions.

¶3Affirmed.

¶4. We indicated in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 243 N.W.2d 737 (1976), that a criminal defendant is entitled to at least one right of review by an appellate court, and we believe that that applies even to misdemeanor convictions.

/330/nw2d/458 · .json · Public domain