State v. Duncan

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Duncan

203 N.W.2d 392, 295 Minn. 541, 1973 Minn. LEXIS 1332

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided January 12, 1973·No. No. 42234·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery under Minn. St. 609.245. Upon this appeal from the judgment of conviction, we also review the order denying his subsequent petition for postconviction relief. Essentially, defendant contends that (1) his arrest was unlawful and therefore evidence seized as a result of the arrest was inadmissible, (2) the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict, (3) the evidence admitted at the postconviction hearing proved that he did not participate in the crime, and (4) his public defender did not represent him adequately. We have carefully reviewed the record and find no error.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery under Minn. St. 609.245. Upon this appeal from the judgment of conviction, we also review the order denying his subsequent petition for postconviction relief. Essentially, defendant contends that (1) his arrest was unlawful and therefore evidence seized as a result of the arrest was inadmissible, (2) the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict, (3) the evidence admitted at the postconviction hearing proved that he did not participate in the crime, and (4) his public defender did not represent him adequately. We have carefully reviewed the record and find no error.

Affirmed.

State v. Duncan, 203 N.W.2d 392, 295 Minn. 541, 1973 Minn. LEXIS 1332 (Mich. 1973).

Pincite

203 N.W.2d 392 (State v. Duncan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.