Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dereje v. State

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 9, 2013No. A11-1147Published

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

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Florida v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. State v. MyersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984

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

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

Powered by the Exa API