Legal Opinion
State v. Phipps
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided September 17, 2012No. A11-1795PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JOHNSON, Chief Judge.
Aaron Bobby Phipps was charged with violating an ex parte order for protection that prohibited him from having any contact with his estranged wife. Phipps moved to dismiss the charge on the ground *284that the order is void because it is unconstitutionally vague. The district court denied the motion. We conclude that the order is not void because its “no contact” provision is not unconstitutionally vague. Therefore, we affirm.
FACTS
On May 25, 2010, Y.S.P petitioned the Hennepin County District Court for an order for protection (OFP) against her husband, Phipps. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- State v. NewstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Dunham v. RoerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Peters-Riemers v. RiemersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. BussmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State of Minnesota v. David Lee HaywoodCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
- In re the Welfare of B.A.H.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- State of Minnesota v. Ann Adrion SchochCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015