Legal Opinion

State v. Schultz

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 6, 1978No. 47284PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant, who was found guilty by a district court jury of aggravated rape, Minn.St.1974, § 609.291(2), and indecent liberties, Minn.St.1974, § 609.296, subd. 1(2), appeals from an order denying his post-trial motion for a new trial. The sole issue on appeal is whether the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct in his closing argument by expressing his personal opinion of defendant’s guilt. While the prosecutor did use expressions of personal opinion, we do not believe that the prosecutor’s comments prejudiced defendant. See, State v. Prettyman, 293 Minn. 493, 198 N.W.2d 156 (1972).

Altho…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. CaronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  2. State v. PrettymanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. TureSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  2. Schultz v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. State v. StreeterCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Schultz v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  5. State v. SchultzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API