Legal Opinion
State v. Hinton
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided August 9, 2005No. A04-1220PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MINGE, Judge.
Appellant challenges his conviction of felony violation of an order for protection on two grounds: (1) that it was error to admit a stipulation of his prior convictions into evidence; and (2) that the evidence is insufficient to convict him. We affirm.
FACTS
Appellant Michael Walton Hinton married D.H. on February 4, 1984. After many years of marriage and three children, they separated. On May 15, 2001, the district court issued an order for protection (OFP), which stated that “[Appellant] shall have no contact, either direct or indirect, with [D.H.] whether in person, with…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Old Chief v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- State v. AltonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2008
- State v. KuhlmannCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- In Re the Welfare of J.C.P.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- State v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- State v. FlukerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.