State v. Sperl

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Sperl

287 N.W.2d 923, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1774

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedDecember 21, 1979

DocketNo. 49991

StatusPublished

This text of 287 N.W.2d 923 (State v. Sperl) 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. Sperl, 287 N.W.2d 923, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1774 (Mich. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

YETKA, Justice.

Defendant, who was charged with felony theft (theft of more than $100), Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(1), 3(2) (1974), was found guilty by a district court jury of the lesser-included offense of misdemeanor theft (theft of $100 or less), § 609.52, subd. 3(5). The trial court has stayed imposition of sentence pending the outcome of this appeal by defendant. Issues raised by defendant relate to the sufficiency of the evidence and the propriety of the trial court’s submitting the lesser offense over defense counsel’s objection. We affirm.

There is no merit to defendant’s contention that the evidence of his guilt was legally insufficient. Defendant’s other contention basically is that a defendant ought to be able to prevent submission of lesser offenses. We have rejected this contention in a number of cases, most recently in State v. Schluter, 281 N.W.2d 174 (Minn.1979). We again do so in this case.

Affirmed.

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

YETKA, Justice.

Defendant, who was charged with felony theft (theft of more than $100), Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(1), 3(2) (1974), was found guilty by a district court jury of the lesser-included offense of misdemeanor theft (theft of $100 or less), § 609.52, subd. 3(5). The trial court has stayed imposition of sentence pending the outcome of this appeal by defendant. Issues raised by defendant relate to the sufficiency of the evidence and the propriety of the trial court’s submitting the lesser offense over defense counsel’s objection. We affirm.

There is no merit to defendant’s contention that the evidence of his guilt was legally insufficient. Defendant’s other contention basically is that a defendant ought to be able to prevent submission of lesser offenses. We have rejected this contention in a number of cases, most recently in State v. Schluter, 281 N.W.2d 174 (Minn.1979). We again do so in this case.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 N.W.2d 923, 1979 Minn. LEXIS 1774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sperl-minn-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack