State v. Bosnich

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Bosnich

142 N.W.2d 63, 273 Minn. 553, 1966 Minn. LEXIS 863

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedApril 15, 1966

Docket39783

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 142 N.W.2d 63 (State v. Bosnich) 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. Bosnich, 142 N.W.2d 63, 273 Minn. 553, 1966 Minn. LEXIS 863 (Mich. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a conviction for theft prosecuted under Minn. St. 609.52, subds. 2(1) and 3(3) (a), (L. 1963, c. 753, § 609.52, subds. 2[1] and 3[3][a]) asserting that his arrest was illegal; that he was deprived of counsel; that the evidence fails to sustain the verdict; and that he is now entitled to a substitution of attorneys.

Defendant complains of brutal treatment incident to his arrest which he contends deprived the court of jurisdiction. In addition, he alleges he was denied the right to counsel for a period of 8 days following his arrest. These matters do not appear in the settled case or in the record, and since they were not presented to the trial court, we decline to review them. In any event, they are not shown to have resulted in any prejudice on the question of defendant’s guilt or innocence, State v. Perra, 266 Minn. 545, 125 N. W. (2d) 44; Williams v. United States, 120 App. D. C. 244, 345 F. (2d) 733, *554 as he was adequately represented by the public defender throughout all these proceedings from the time of his arraignment in the district court.

Three eyewitnesses identified defendant as one of the two persons who committed the theft for which he was prosecuted. We find the evidence sufficient to support his conviction.

Although the attorney who was appointed to represent defendant on appeal initially took the position that there was no basis in the record for reversal, he has nevertheless pursued the appeal vigorously and conscientiously. Whatever may have been his original appraisal, he has now diligently discharged his duty in advocating appellant’s cause. Bentley v. State (Alaska) 393 P. (2d) 225.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a conviction for theft prosecuted under Minn. St. 609.52, subds. 2(1) and 3(3) (a), (L. 1963, c. 753, § 609.52, subds. 2[1] and 3[3][a]) asserting that his arrest was illegal; that he was deprived of counsel; that the evidence fails to sustain the verdict; and that he is now entitled to a substitution of attorneys.

Defendant complains of brutal treatment incident to his arrest which he contends deprived the court of jurisdiction. In addition, he alleges he was denied the right to counsel for a period of 8 days following his arrest. These matters do not appear in the settled case or in the record, and since they were not presented to the trial court, we decline to review them. In any event, they are not shown to have resulted in any prejudice on the question of defendant’s guilt or innocence, State v. Perra, 266 Minn. 545, 125 N. W. (2d) 44; Williams v. United States, 120 App. D. C. 244, 345 F. (2d) 733, *554 as he was adequately represented by the public defender throughout all these proceedings from the time of his arraignment in the district court.

Three eyewitnesses identified defendant as one of the two persons who committed the theft for which he was prosecuted. We find the evidence sufficient to support his conviction.

Although the attorney who was appointed to represent defendant on appeal initially took the position that there was no basis in the record for reversal, he has nevertheless pursued the appeal vigorously and conscientiously. Whatever may have been his original appraisal, he has now diligently discharged his duty in advocating appellant’s cause. Bentley v. State (Alaska) 393 P. (2d) 225.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 N.W.2d 63, 273 Minn. 553, 1966 Minn. LEXIS 863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bosnich-minn-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack