Dereje v. State
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentPage, Justice
I respectfully dissent. Although I agree with Justice Wright that Dereje did not receive a stipulated-facts trial and that Dereje’s trial counsel was ineffective, I write separately to point out two additional problems with the court’s decision in this case.
I
It is undisputed on appeal that both Dereje and the State intended that De-reje’s guilt be determined using the “Trial on Stipulated Facts” procedure pursuant to Minn. R.Crim. P. 26.01, subd. 3(a) (providing that “[t]he defendant and the prosecutor may agree that a determination of defendant’s guilt ... may be submitted to and tried by…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Florida v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- State v. MyersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.