Legal Opinion
State v. Orsello
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 31, 1996No. C2-94-1435PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARDEBRING, Justice.
The appellant in this case, Paul Edward Orsello, appeals from his conviction under Minnesota’s “stalking” statute, Minn.Stat. § 609.749 (1993). Orsello argues that the statute is ambiguous as to the level of intent required to convict him and that the statute should be read to require specific intent. In the alternative, Orsello asserts that if the statute is construed to require only general intent, then it is unconstitutionally “void for vagueness.” The court of appeals agreed with the trial court that the language of the statute required only general rather than *71s…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lanzetta v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Liparota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- People v. StuartNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- State v. FleckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- State v. LogeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- State v. VanceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. IversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.