State v. Rudolph

ROGOSHESKE, Justice.

Defendants, who were found guilty of illegal shining for wild animals, a gross misdemeanor, Minn.Stat. § 100.29, subd. 10 (1976), 1 contend on this appeal from judgment of conviction that the evidence of their guilt was legally insufficient, that the statute, as applied to them, is unconstitutionally vague, and that the trial court committed prejudicial error in excluding certain evidence which defendants contend bore on whether their purpose in shining was an improper purpose. We affirm.

Conservation officers, who had established nighttime aerial and ground surveillance of…