Jackson v. State

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Jackson v. State

269 N.W.2d 23, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1243

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 23, 1978

Docket47833

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 269 N.W.2d 23 (Jackson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jackson v. State, 269 N.W.2d 23, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1243 (Mich. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of aggravated assault and attempted aggravated robbery and was sentenced for the latter offense to a prison term of 3 to 10 years, Minn.St. 609.11, 609.-17, 609.245. On this appeal from the order denying his petition for postconviction relief, defendant challenges the fairness of the identification procedures used by the police and the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.

Police captured defendant within minutes after the crime and immediately returned him to the scene, where the two victims positively and unhesitatingly identified him as one of their two assailants. A consideration of all the relevant factors convinces us that there was no “very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification” — see, Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S.Ct. 375, 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972), and Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977) — and therefore we hold that the trial court did not err in admitting the identification evidence.

There is no merit to the contention that the evidence of defendant’s guilt was legally insufficient.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of aggravated assault and attempted aggravated robbery and was sentenced for the latter offense to a prison term of 3 to 10 years, Minn.St. 609.11, 609.-17, 609.245. On this appeal from the order denying his petition for postconviction relief, defendant challenges the fairness of the identification procedures used by the police and the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.

Police captured defendant within minutes after the crime and immediately returned him to the scene, where the two victims positively and unhesitatingly identified him as one of their two assailants. A consideration of all the relevant factors convinces us that there was no “very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification” — see, Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S.Ct. 375, 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972), and Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977) — and therefore we hold that the trial court did not err in admitting the identification evidence.

There is no merit to the contention that the evidence of defendant’s guilt was legally insufficient.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 N.W.2d 23, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-state-minn-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack