Legal Opinion
State v. Brink
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 1, 1993No. C5-92-2445PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SHORT, Judge.
This appeal involves the admissibility of expert psychiatric testimony based on the meaning of the phrase “to know the nature of the act” in Minn.Stat. § 611.026 (1990). Douglas James Brink was charged with two counts of attempted first-degree murder and one count of second-degree assault in violation of Minn.Stat. §§ 609.185(4), 609.17, 609.222 (1990). Brink asserted a defense of not guilty by reason of mental illness or deficiency under Minn.Stat. § 611.026 and Minn.R.Crim.P. 14.01(c). Following psychological examination under Minn.R.Crim.P. 20, Brink made a motion to…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Duane Earl Pope v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
- State v. HelterbridleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. BouwmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- State v. HoskinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- State v. LarsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. ArendsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- State v. LilleskovCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- State v. AmbayeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- State v. SaundersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996