Legal Opinion

State v. Hanson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 15, 1985No. CX-84-1522PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RANDALL, Judge.

Appellant claims that the record of his prior D.W.I. conviction did not contain a valid waiver of right to counsel and, therefore, cannot be used to enhance his present D.W.I. conviction from a misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor. We agree and reverse.

FACTS

Appellant was convicted of gross misdemeanor D.W.I,, Minn.Stat. § 169.121, subd. 1(a) and subd. 3(a) (Supp.1983) for driving with an alcohol concentration of .10 within five years of a previous conviction. The omnibus court ruled that the record of appellant’s prior 1981 D.W.I. conviction showed that in entering a plea…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Henderson v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. State v. NordstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  3. State v. JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  4. Burt v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  5. State v. MotlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. SandmoenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  2. State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  3. Vernlund v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
  4. State v. GrunewaldCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. State v. LyleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987

2 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