State v. Rogne
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant was indicted for the crime of malicious mischief by the grand jury. The case was tried in the district court for Polk county and resulted in a verdict of guilty. Prom an order, Watts, J., denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, he appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Defendant was indicted and convicted on the'charge of malicious mischief, and appealed from an order denying a new trial.
The assignments- of error present two questions, namely: (1) Whether the evidence supports thé verdict of guilty; and (2) whether defendant’s constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures (section 10, art. 1, Const.) and being compelled to give evidence against himself (article 1, § 7, Const.) were violated on the trial below.
1. The offense charged was that of maliciously placing a large number of pieces of scrap iron in different sheaves of grain…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. StoffelsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. PluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- Wiggin v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1922
- State v. HesseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- City of St. Paul v. StovallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.