Legal Opinion

State v. Mimbach

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided March 8, 1988No. C6-87-799PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SCHUMACHER, Judge.

This appeal is from a conviction for forgery, Minn.Stat. § 609.63, subd. l(5)(1984)(false entry falsifying a business document). Appellant Mark Mimbach was acquitted of attempted theft by false representation, Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(3), and the trial court set aside his conviction for attempted theft by swindle, Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(4). We reverse the forgery conviction.

FACTS

Appellant Mark Mimbach’s Ace Hardware store was burglarized on April 12, 1984. Sauk Rapids police discovered the rear door of the store was open at 3:00 a.m. Mimbach was called to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Dunn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Gilbert v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Wayne S. Marteney v. United States of America, C. M. Henderson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954
  4. State v. MarkWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Sterling State Bank v. Virginia Surety CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Weigman v. Everest InstituteDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API