Legal Opinion

Bolinger v. State

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided June 18, 2002No. C9-01-2134PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STONEBURNER, Judge.

Appellant contests an order denying his postconviction petition for relief on the grounds that his plea to controlled-substance crime in the second degree was not knowingly and voluntarily made, was inaccurate, and lacked the required factual basis because appellant was questioned about a different offense at the plea hearing. We reverse and remand.

FACTS

In June 1999 appellant Steven Douglas Bolinger made two controlled-substance sales to-an undercover police officer. On June 1, 1999, appellant allegedly sold four “ten-strips” 1 of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. Paul A. RussellCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  2. State v. EckerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
  3. Fox v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  4. Perkins v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  5. State v. RainerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  2. James v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  3. Black v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
  4. James v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  5. State v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API