In Re the Civil Commitment of Martin
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HARTEN, Judge.
Appellant Anoka County challenges the district court’s denial of a petition to have respondent James Martin committed as a sexually dangerous person; respondent argues that Minn.Stat. § 253B.02, subds. 7a, 18c (2002), the sexually dangerous person statute, is unconstitutional as applied to him. 1 Because we conclude that the statute is constitutional as applied to respondent but that the district court erred in finding that respondent’s acts did not constitute harmful sexual conduct and that there was not clear and convincing evidence that respondent has an inability to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re LinehanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Matter of LinehanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- In Re LinehanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- Hard Times Cafe, Inc. v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
3Cited by9 opinions
- Anicich v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- In re the Civil Commitment of NavratilCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Whitten v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
- Martin v. BensonDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2011
- Citizens for Rule of Law v. Senate Committee on Rules & AdministrationCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.