State v. Wicklund

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Wicklund

201 N.W.2d 147, 295 Minn. 402, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1127

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedSeptember 15, 1972

Docket43570

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 201 N.W.2d 147 (State v. Wicklund) 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. Wicklund, 201 N.W.2d 147, 295 Minn. 402, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1127 (Mich. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The state appeals from an order by the district court suppressing marijuana which police officers without a warrant seized from defendant. At the Rasmussen hearing, two police officers testified on behalf of the state concerning the events that led up to the search and seizure of the evidence suppressed by the court. Three witnesses contradicted portions of the police officers’ testimony. No useful purpose would be served in reciting all of the testimony in detail.

The trial court, in suppressing the seized marijuana, relied on State v. Curtis, 290 Minn. 429, 190 N. W. 2d 631 (1971), and State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 191 N. W. 2d 555 (1971).

We are not in position to review this case because of the absence of any findings of fact. The memorandum of the court is not helpful in this case as to fact questions as it does not comment on the evidence. We do not know if the trial court accepted as true all of the testimony on behalf of the state and neverthe *403 less suppressed the evidence or if the conflicting testimony of defendant was the basis for the decision. The cause is, therefore, remanded in order that the district court may make findings of fact.

Remanded.

Mr. Justice MacLaughlin, not having been a member of this court at the time of the argument and submission, 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

Per Curiam.

The state appeals from an order by the district court suppressing marijuana which police officers without a warrant seized from defendant. At the Rasmussen hearing, two police officers testified on behalf of the state concerning the events that led up to the search and seizure of the evidence suppressed by the court. Three witnesses contradicted portions of the police officers’ testimony. No useful purpose would be served in reciting all of the testimony in detail.

The trial court, in suppressing the seized marijuana, relied on State v. Curtis, 290 Minn. 429, 190 N. W. 2d 631 (1971), and State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 191 N. W. 2d 555 (1971).

We are not in position to review this case because of the absence of any findings of fact. The memorandum of the court is not helpful in this case as to fact questions as it does not comment on the evidence. We do not know if the trial court accepted as true all of the testimony on behalf of the state and neverthe *403 less suppressed the evidence or if the conflicting testimony of defendant was the basis for the decision. The cause is, therefore, remanded in order that the district court may make findings of fact.

Remanded.

Mr. Justice MacLaughlin, not having been a member of this court at the time of the argument and submission, took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 N.W.2d 147, 295 Minn. 402, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wicklund-minn-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack