Legal Opinion

State v. Maddox

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 28, 2013No. A12-1208PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SCHELLHAS, Judge.

Appellant challenges the district court’s denial of relief regarding three restitution orders, arguing that the district court (1) violated appellant’s right to counsel by not obtaining a waiver from appellant before allowing him to represent himself and (2) failed to make findings that the state proved the restitution amounts by a preponderance of the evidence. Appellant also presents several pro se arguments. Because we agree that the district court violated appellant’s right to counsel, we need not reach the remaining issues, and we reverse and remand for a new…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. Gardner v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  5. Mempa v. RhaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Kenneth E. AndersenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
  2. State of Minnesota v. Joel Patrick RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API