Legal Opinion

State v. Wickner

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 27, 2004No. C4-03-215PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CRIPPEN, Judge. *

Appellant Lance Wickner challenges the judgment convicting him of escape. Although he acknowledges the governing statute specifically defines escape to include absconding from electronic monitoring, he contends he could not be convicted because the statute also contains an exception for parole violators. Because this exception does not deal with appellant’s conduct, we affirm. And because the record does not permit review, we decline to address appellant’s further assertion that his conviction resulted from vindictive prosecution.

FACTS

Appellant was released from the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. ColvinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  2. State v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
  3. State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Coin Wholesalers, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  4. State v. ChristianSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  5. State v. LilleskovCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. McDonnellCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  2. State v. Sh akaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API