State of Minnesota v. Ronald Gene Kremmin

OPINION

CONNOLLY, Judge

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for misdemeanor trespassing, arguing that the property owner did not tell him to leave the property and that the plain language of the statute requires both a command to leave and a command not to return. Because the plain language of Minn. Stat. § 609.605, subd. 1(b)(8), requires both commands, we reverse appellant’s conviction.

FACTS

Appellant Ronald Gene Kremmin and his wife had separated at the time of the charged offense, and appellant’s wife and son lived at the house of S.S. Appellant’s…