Legal Opinion

State v. Alm

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 17, 1956No. 36,810PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff moves for a dismissal of the appeal of the defendant from the order of the District Court of Kandiyohi County denying defendant’s petition for a writ of coram nobis. The motion is made upon the ground that the notice of appeal was not served either upon the county attorney or the attorney general. Defendant concedes that such service was- not made. The appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 2

2

See, M. S. A. 632.02, 605.03; State v. Besse, 160 Minn. 533, 200 N. W. 356; State v. Newman, 188 Minn. 461, 247 N. W. 576. Whether the review should be some other remedy than appeal…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. BesseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  2. State v. NewmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. AlmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  2. State Ex Rel. Farrington v. RiggSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  3. State v. HigginsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1966
  4. State Ex Rel. Danielsen v. TahashSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
  5. State v. CageSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962

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

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

Powered by the Exa API