Legal Opinion

In re Commitment of Johnson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided June 17, 2019No. A18-1818PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLarkin, Judge

In 2012, appellant was committed as a sexually dangerous person (SDP) and as a sexual psychopathic personality (SPP). In 2018, appellant moved for a new trial and asked the district court to appoint an attorney to represent him in the proceedings on his motion. As support for his motion, appellant asserted that his court-appointed attorney in the commitment proceedings was under the influence of a mood-altering substance and provided ineffective assistance of counsel as a result. The district court denied appellant's request for court-appointed counsel, as well as his motion for a new trial.…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Gates v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
  2. State v. JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Opsahl v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
  4. State v. RhodesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  5. Finden v. KlaasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Edward Everett UrbanekCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2025
  2. In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Peter Allan aka Peter Allan GeorgeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API