Sanderson v. State
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge.
This appeal is from an order denying postconviction relief. Appellant Kirk Sanderson challenges his conviction for criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, arguing that (1) the trial court erred in admitting Spreigl evidence and refusing the jury instructions Sanderson requested; and (2) he is entitled to a new trial because of prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel. Because: (1) the trial court did not err in admitting “other wrongs or acts” evidence or refusing to give the jury instructions Sanderson requested; (2) the prosecution…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- State v. CaronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Alholm v. WiltSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Gates v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- State v. ParkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. DeYoungCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- In re PooleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018
- James Donald Dahl v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
- Sanderson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999