State v. Fields

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Fields

272 N.W.2d 264, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1199

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedNovember 9, 1978

DocketNo. 48098

StatusPublished

This text of 272 N.W.2d 264 (State v. Fields) 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. Fields, 272 N.W.2d 264, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1199 (Mich. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of attempted theft over $100, Minn.St. 609.17, subd. 1, and 609.-52, subds. 2(3) and 3(2), and was sentenced by the trial court to a maximum indeterminate term of 2½ years in prison. On this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant contends that he should be granted a new trial because his first trial was tainted by the improper admission of evidence which indicated his involvement in crimes of a similar nature. We disagree with the contention that the evidence in question indicated defendant’s involvement in other crimes. Further, the key disputed issue at trial was whether defendant was the person who had attempted the theft (by making a false credit application). The challenged testimony, even if it implied other similar crimes by the person who committed this one, did not bear on whether defendant was that person. The evidence that defendant was that person was very strong.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of attempted theft over $100, Minn.St. 609.17, subd. 1, and 609.-52, subds. 2(3) and 3(2), and was sentenced by the trial court to a maximum indeterminate term of 2½ years in prison. On this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant contends that he should be granted a new trial because his first trial was tainted by the improper admission of evidence which indicated his involvement in crimes of a similar nature. We disagree with the contention that the evidence in question indicated defendant’s involvement in other crimes. Further, the key disputed issue at trial was whether defendant was the person who had attempted the theft (by making a false credit application). The challenged testimony, even if it implied other similar crimes by the person who committed this one, did not bear on whether defendant was that person. The evidence that defendant was that person was very strong.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 N.W.2d 264, 1978 Minn. LEXIS 1199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-fields-minn-1978.