Legal Opinion

State v. Enger

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided October 31, 1995No. C5-95-63PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Appellant claims the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant a new trial or judgment of acquittal, arguing: (1) there was insufficient evidence for his conviction of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree; (2) the trial court abused its discretion by providing the parties with only a portion of B.B.’s diary; (3) the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Spreigl evidence of a prior bad act by appellant; and (4) the trial court erred in sentencing. Because we conclude that appellant’s sufficiency and eviden-tiary arguments are without merit, we…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  2. State v. MooreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  3. Holman v. All Nation Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  4. State v. BlackSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  5. State v. KellySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. KoperskiCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
  2. State Ex Rel. Peterson v. FabianCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
  3. State v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API