State v. Soukup
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUDSON, Judge.
Appellant Philip Leighton Soukup challenges his misdemeanor conviction of disorderly conduct, arguing that the trial court erred by ruling that, as a matter of law, self-defense does not apply where the defendant is charged with the offense of disorderly conduct. We hold that a defendant may raise a claim of self-defense to a charge of disorderly conduct where the behavior forming the basis of the offense presents the threat of bodily harm. But because the evidence in the record, as a matter of law, does not support a claim of self-defense, the trial court’s erroneous…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- State v. JuarezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. MurphySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- State Ex Rel. Foster v. NaftalinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
- Jack Frost, Inc. v. Engineered Building Components Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- State v. GrahamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. HagenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- In Re T.W.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2008
- Community Partners Designs, Inc. v. City of LonsdaleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
- State v. KilmerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. ZaisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.