State v. Antrim
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STONEBURNER, Judge.
The district court denied appellant’s motion to suppress evidence. Because that issue was dispositive of the charge of fifth-degree controlled-substance crime, appellant sought to preserve the pretrial issue by stipulating to the prosecution’s case, waiving a jury trial, and submitting the case to the district court for a decision. The district court found her guilty. Appellant asserts in this appeal that her conviction must be reversed because she was not adequately advised of, and did not waive, her right to call witnesses favorable to the defense. Appellant also…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. LothenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- A.C. Ford v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
- State v. HalsethCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- State v. KnollCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. EhmkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. KuhlmannCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- State v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- State v. FlukerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- State of Minnesota v. Harry Maddox, IIICourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
- State of Minnesota v. John Everette PierceCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.