State v. Russell

236 N.W.2d 612, 306 Minn. 274, 1975 Minn. LEXIS 1247
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedNovember 28, 1975
Docket44610
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 236 N.W.2d 612 (State v. Russell) 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. Russell, 236 N.W.2d 612, 306 Minn. 274, 1975 Minn. LEXIS 1247 (Mich. 1975).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant was charged by indictment with aggravated robbery and first-degree murder, Minn. St. 609.185 and 609.245. Pursuant to a plea agreement negotiated by his attorney, defendant pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of second-degree murder, Minn. St. 609.19, and was sentenced by the district court to a prison term of 3 to 25 years, with the sentence to run concurrently with a sentence of 3 to 10 years defendant was then serving for another crime.

On this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant contends that the district court should not have accepted his guilty plea because the record does not disclose an adequate factual basis for the plea nor contain sufficient evidence that he understood the nature and elements of the charge to which he pleaded guilty. We affirm.

The rule is that a trial court may not accept a defendant’s guilty plea unless it is first satisfied that, among other things, the plea is supported by an adequate factual basis. There must *275 be sufficient facts on the record to support a conclusion that the defendant actually committed a crime at least as serious as the one to which he pleaded guilty. Beaman v. State, 301 Minn. 180, 221 N. W. 2d 698 (1974); State v. Gustafson, 298 Minn. 200, 214 N. W. 2d 341 (1974). Defendant’s answers to questions by the prosecutor in this case disclose a factual basis for the plea even though no question was specifically directed to the element of intent to kill. State v. Hopkins, 293 Minn. 522, 198 N. W. 2d 542 (1972).

As a result of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U. S. 238, 89 S. Ct. 1709, 23 L. ed. 2d 274 (1969), we cannot presume from a silent record that a defendant who pleaded guilty did so intelligently and voluntarily. However, the record in this case is not silent but shows that defendant had a full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering the plea. We therefore may safely presume that counsel informed him adequately concerning the nature and elements of the offense. State v. Propotnik, 299 Minn. 56, 216 N. W. 2d 637 (1974).

Affirmed.

Mr. Justice Scott took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Related

Abdullahi Aden Ibrahim v. State of Minnesota
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2024
State of Minnesota v. Mark Christian Wolhowe
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Taylor Rod
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2016
State of Minnesota v. William Terrell Jackson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2015
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Trent Johnson
867 N.W.2d 210 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2015)
Cheng Pao Vue v. State of Minnesota
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2015
State of Minnesota v. Damien Lashaun Nelson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2015
State v. Lyle
409 N.W.2d 549 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1987)
State v. Brown
324 N.W.2d 380 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1982)
State v. Melina
295 N.W.2d 644 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1980)
State v. Neumann
262 N.W.2d 426 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
236 N.W.2d 612, 306 Minn. 274, 1975 Minn. LEXIS 1247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-russell-minn-1975.