Legal Opinion

State v. Bishop

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided April 9, 1996No. C3-95-2359PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EDWARD D. MULALLY, Judge.

Appellant Roger William Bishop pleaded guilty to gross misdemeanor driving after cancellation (DAC) and to aggravated driving while intoxicated (DWI). See Minn.Stat. §§ 171.24(c)(1), 169.129 (Supp.1993). He was sentenced on the gross misdemeanor DAC charge and thereafter moved to dismiss the aggravated DWI charge, claiming that sentencing on the aggravated DWI would constitute multiple punishment in violation of Minn.Stat. § 609.035 (Supp.1993). The trial court denied Bishop’s motion and sentenced him on the aggravated DWI charge. Bishop appeals. Because we…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
  2. State v. TrottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  3. State v. BookwalterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
  4. State v. BanksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  5. City of Moorhead v. MillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ReimerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  2. Oji Konata Markham v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
  3. State of Minnesota v. Richard Lee CunninghamCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API