Legal Opinion
State v. Harrington
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided August 3, 1993No. C3-92-2556, C5-92-2557PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HAROLD W. SCHULTZ, Acting Judge.
Matthew Harrington and Mary Friberg challenge their convictions for violating a restraining order issued under the Minnesota harassment statute, Minn.Stat. § 609.-748, subd. 5 (1990). We affirm.
FACTS
Between March 17 and July 17, 1990, appellants Matthew Harrington and Mary Friberg and other anti-abortion protesters picketed outside Jeri Rasmussen's home, carrying anti-abortion placards, shouting at Rasmussen, and causing Rasmussen to fear for her safety. Following approximately eight such incidents, Rasmussen, who is the director of a clinic providing…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Frisby v. SchultzSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- State v. MooreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Samuels v. McCurdySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. GrilloCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- State v. NessCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
- State v. RomineCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- In Re the Welfare of B.C.G.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- Rew v. BergstromCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.