Legal Opinion

State v. Wallace

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided April 2, 1996No. C7-95-1862PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PARKER, Judge.

Pursuant to his plea agreement, Anthony Earl Wallace was ordered to pay $3,700 in restitution to the “buy fund” of the Southeast Minnesota Drug Task Force. Three years later, Wallace petitioned for postconviction relief from the restitution order. Denying the motion, the district court found the order for payment of restitution to be a valid negotiated plea agreement embodied in a Rule 15 petition accepted by the court as part of his sentencing order. See Minn. R.Crim. P. 15 App. A. We affirm.

FACTS

In June 1992, Wallace petitioned the district court to accept a negotiated…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Scruggs v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  2. State v. GivensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  3. People v. StarksIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  4. People v. LawrenceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990
  5. State v. DillonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  2. State v. VerscheldeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1998
  3. State v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API