Kallio v. State

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Kallio v. State

281 N.W.2d 174, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1546

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJune 8, 1979

DocketNo. 49285

StatusPublished

This text of 281 N.W.2d 174 (Kallio 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

Kallio v. State, 281 N.W.2d 174, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1546 (Mich. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of aggravated assault (assault with a dangerous weapon) and was sentenced by the trial court to a 1-to 5-year prison term. Minn.St. 609.225, subd. 2, 609.05, 609.11. This appeal is from an order of the district court denying a petition for postconviction relief. Petitioner makes a number of contentions: (1) that the court prejudicially erred in admitting certain evidence, (2) that the trial court made a statement during closing argument which prejudiced the defense, and (3) that petitioner’s privately-retained trial counsel did not competently represent him at trial. Our examination of the record convinces us that there is no merit to any of these contentions, and we affirm.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of aggravated assault (assault with a dangerous weapon) and was sentenced by the trial court to a 1-to 5-year prison term. Minn.St. 609.225, subd. 2, 609.05, 609.11. This appeal is from an order of the district court denying a petition for postconviction relief. Petitioner makes a number of contentions: (1) that the court prejudicially erred in admitting certain evidence, (2) that the trial court made a statement during closing argument which prejudiced the defense, and (3) that petitioner’s privately-retained trial counsel did not competently represent him at trial. Our examination of the record convinces us that there is no merit to any of these contentions, and we affirm.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 N.W.2d 174, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1546, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kallio-v-state-minn-1979.