In re A.J.B.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtWorke, Judge
Appellant argues that his adjudications for stalking and harassment must be reversed because (1) Minn. Stat. §§ 609.749, subd. 2(6), and .795, subd. 1(3), are unconstitutionally overbroad both facially and as applied, and (2) the evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We affirm.
FACTS
In March 2016, high school students, W.K., B.L., and appellant A.J.B., discussed that M.B., a fellow student who had been diagnosed with autism and ADHD, had recently posted some tweets discussing girls at school. B.L. and A.J.B. told W.K. that they wanted to post materials on…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Lovell v. City of GriffinSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- United States v. Jovica PetrovicCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
- United States v. ShraderCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
- State v. WicklundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Matter of Welfare of A. J. B.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2019