State v. Atkins

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Atkins

355 N.W.2d 410, 1984 Minn. LEXIS 1478

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedOctober 12, 1984

DocketC2-82-1641

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 355 N.W.2d 410 (State v. Atkins) 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

State v. Atkins, 355 N.W.2d 410, 1984 Minn. LEXIS 1478 (Mich. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

KELLEY, Justice.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of aggravated robbery, Minn.Stat. § 609.245 (1982). The trial *411 court sentenced him to a prison term of 54 months, the then-presumptive sentence under section 609.11 and Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II. E. (1982). The trial court later reduced this, pursuant to State v. Olson, 325 N.W.2d 13 (Minn.1982), to 41 months, which is the normal presumptive sentence duration for aggravated robbery by a person with a criminal history score of two. On this appeal, defendant contends (1) that his conviction should be reversed outright because the state failed to prove that he knowingly and intentionally aided in the commission of the robbery or (2) that at least he should be given a new trial because the prosecutor committed prejudicial error in his closing argument. These contentions are without merit. The state’s evidence included testimony by the clerk of the store that was robbed that defendant actively participated with the gunman in the robbery, evidence that defendant and the gunman fled the scene together, and evidence that when he was identified by the clerk a few minutes after the robbery, defendant made an incriminating statement in which he admitted participating in the robbery. We are satisfied that the claimed prejudicial error allegedly in the prosecutors closing argument was not plain error. Moreover, appellant’s experienced defense counsel made no objection to the allegedly erroneous argument.

Affirmed.

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

KELLEY, Justice.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of aggravated robbery, Minn.Stat. § 609.245 (1982). The trial *411 court sentenced him to a prison term of 54 months, the then-presumptive sentence under section 609.11 and Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II. E. (1982). The trial court later reduced this, pursuant to State v. Olson, 325 N.W.2d 13 (Minn.1982), to 41 months, which is the normal presumptive sentence duration for aggravated robbery by a person with a criminal history score of two. On this appeal, defendant contends (1) that his conviction should be reversed outright because the state failed to prove that he knowingly and intentionally aided in the commission of the robbery or (2) that at least he should be given a new trial because the prosecutor committed prejudicial error in his closing argument. These contentions are without merit. The state’s evidence included testimony by the clerk of the store that was robbed that defendant actively participated with the gunman in the robbery, evidence that defendant and the gunman fled the scene together, and evidence that when he was identified by the clerk a few minutes after the robbery, defendant made an incriminating statement in which he admitted participating in the robbery. We are satisfied that the claimed prejudicial error allegedly in the prosecutors closing argument was not plain error. Moreover, appellant’s experienced defense counsel made no objection to the allegedly erroneous argument.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

355 N.W.2d 410, 1984 Minn. LEXIS 1478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-atkins-minn-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack