State v. Tamminen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Tamminen

162 N.W.2d 369, 282 Minn. 523, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 950

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedNovember 1, 1968

Docket40965

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 162 N.W.2d 369 (State v. Tamminen) 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. Tamminen, 162 N.W.2d 369, 282 Minn. 523, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 950 (Mich. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a guilty plea on an information charging attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. He now claims that he was wrongfully induced to enter a plea of *524 guilty because of fear that evidence obtained by an invalid search and seizure might be used against him in a trial, an illegally obtained confession, and statements of his counsel that he would receive a much more serious sentence if he were tried and found guilty.

As in State v. Gilles, 279 Minn. 363, 157 N. W. (2d) 64, the claims of the defendant are wholly devoid of any support in the record covering proceedings at the time of his entry of plea and sentencing. This is another case in which the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial-court level by petition for postconviction relief pursuant to the Post-conviction Remedy Act, L. 1967, c. 336, Minn. St. c. 590.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a guilty plea on an information charging attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. He now claims that he was wrongfully induced to enter a plea of *524 guilty because of fear that evidence obtained by an invalid search and seizure might be used against him in a trial, an illegally obtained confession, and statements of his counsel that he would receive a much more serious sentence if he were tried and found guilty.

As in State v. Gilles, 279 Minn. 363, 157 N. W. (2d) 64, the claims of the defendant are wholly devoid of any support in the record covering proceedings at the time of his entry of plea and sentencing. This is another case in which the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial-court level by petition for postconviction relief pursuant to the Post-conviction Remedy Act, L. 1967, c. 336, Minn. St. c. 590.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 N.W.2d 369, 282 Minn. 523, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 950, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-tamminen-minn-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack