State v. Sahr
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentDietzen, Justice
This case squarely presents an important statewide issue of first impression: whether the double jeopardy protections, provided by statute and the state and federal constitutions, bar future prosecution when a defendant deliberately fails to raise a known defect in the complaint before the jury is sworn. The Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure have long required that a defendant must bring a motion to dismiss the complaint before the omnibus hearing. Appellant Sahr knew the complaint had a curable defect and deliberately failed to raise the defect in order to improperly manufacture a double…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. BallSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Ross v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.