Legal Opinion

State v. LORSUNG

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided March 25, 2003No. C2-02-610PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RANDALL, Judge.

Appellant Laura Lee Lorsung challenges her conviction for second-degree controlled-substance crime, arguing that she cannot properly be convicted of selling methamphetamines because she did not have the intent to complete the sale. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and add a cautionary instruction.

FACTS

On May 5, 2000, a confidential informant (Cl) working with police placed a phone call to appellant Laura Lee Lorsung in an attempt to locate methamphetamine. The Cl left a message, which was returned by appellant. Appellant agreed over the phone to sell the Cl two “eight…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic SecuritySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  2. State v. LothenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. State v. MurphySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  4. State v. KjeldahlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  5. State v. TomlinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. BynumCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
  2. United States of America v. Michael Roman BurghardtDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API