Legal Opinion
State v. Soukup
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided November 12, 1985No. C9-85-405PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
Appellant Paul Soukup appeals from convictions of second degree and fifth degree assault. He contends that the trial court committed reversible error when it admitted hearsay accounts of the assaults pursuant to Minn.R.Evid. 803(24), and expert testimony of the behavioral traits of abused children. We affirm.
FACTS
On September 24, 1982 and March 13, 1984, J.R.S., Soukup’s son, reported to school and police officials that his father had struck him. Soukup was charged with first and second degree assault as a result of J.R.S.’s reports. A trial was held in September 1984,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Di Carlo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- State v. MyersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- State v. SaldanaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- State v. HelterbridleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. OrtleppSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State v. TateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. JurgensCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
- State v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- State v. HallCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- State v. SkjefteCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.