Legal Opinion

State v. Colvin

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 13, 2002No. C4-00-1365PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

LANCASTER, Justice.

This appeal presents the question of whether a criminal defendant’s violation of an order for protection (OFP) is sufficient to establish first-degree burglary, absent the commission of or intent to commit a crime other than a violation of the order for protection.

Peter Allen Colvin (Colvin) was charged by complaint with one count of first-degree burglary. The charge arose from Colvin’s February 25, 1999, illegal entry into the home of his ex-wife, Michelle Colvin. Colvin moved to dismiss the charge, arguing that the violation of an OFP could not form the basis of a…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  2. State v. MurphySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  3. State v. IhleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  4. State v. SotoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  5. State v. HaasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. State v. MaurstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  2. Sanchez v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  3. State v. KoenigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  4. State v. RussellConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  5. State v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013

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

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

Powered by the Exa API