State v. Cotton

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Cotton

201 N.W.2d 859, 294 Minn. 559, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1470

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedNovember 3, 1972

DocketNo. 42247

StatusPublished

This text of 201 N.W.2d 859 (State v. Cotton) 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. Cotton, 201 N.W.2d 859, 294 Minn. 559, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1470 (Mich. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

Defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery, Minn. St. 609.245, and sentenced to an indeterminate term of 0-20 years. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and seeks review of an order denying post-conviction relief. Defendant claims that he did not receive adequate representation from his privately retained counsel because counsel failed to interview various alibi witnesses or call them to testify. Defendant has not met his burden of proving these claims.

Affirmed.

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

Pee Curiam.

Defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery, Minn. St. 609.245, and sentenced to an indeterminate term of 0-20 years. He appeals from the judgment of conviction and seeks review of an order denying post-conviction relief. Defendant claims that he did not receive adequate representation from his privately retained counsel because counsel failed to interview various alibi witnesses or call them to testify. Defendant has not met his burden of proving these claims.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 N.W.2d 859, 294 Minn. 559, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cotton-minn-1972.