State v. Nace
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Per curiam
Defendant contends on this appeal from judgment of conviction of sale of a controlled substance (marijuana) that (1) the record does not contain a sufficient basis for concluding (a) that the plea was knowingly and intelligently entered, or (b) that there was a factual basis for it; and (2) the record compels the conclusion that his counsel did not provide adequate representation. We affirm.
Defendant’s contention that the record does not contain a sufficient basis for concluding that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered is based on the fact that at the time he entered the plea,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. HoaglundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- State v. PropotnikSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- State v. FriesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kochevar v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Perkins v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. LorentzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- State v. MiltonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.