Legal Opinion
State v. MacHholz
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 22, 1998No. CX-96-1865PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAGE, Justice.
Appellant Kurtis Dean Machholz is charged with felony harassment in violation of MinmStat. § 609.749, subds. 1(1), 2(7), and 3(1). At a pre-trial hearing, Machholz moved to dismiss the charges against him, claiming that subdivision 2(7), read in conjunction with subdivision 1(1), and subdivision 3(1) of Minn. Stat. § 609.749 are invalid under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as vague and overbroad on their face and as applied to him. The district court agreed and dismissed the charges against Machholz, finding that Minn.Stat. § 609.749, subd. 2(7), is…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Baribeau v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010
- Tenafly Eruv Ass'n v. Borough of TenaflyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
- People v. RelerfordIllinois Supreme Court · 2017
- Commonwealth v. WelchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
- Dunham v. RoerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.