Legal Opinion

State v. Underdahl

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided March 21, 2000No. C0-99-1050PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HARTEN, Judge.

Appellant challenges his conviction of gross misdemeanor driving under the influence, arguing that his statement in response to a corrections officer’s question should have been suppressed because the officer did not give appellant a Miranda warning. Because we conclude that a Miranda warning was not required, we affirm.

FACTS

Appellant Glen Underdahl', an inmate in a correctional facility, left the facility on a pass to care for livestock on his parents’ farm. He returned, driving a three-wheeler, late, intoxicated, and disheveled. When the corrections officer on duty saw…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Minnesota v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. United States v. Leonard David GriffinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
  4. United States v. Billy Lee JorgensenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
  5. State v. TibiatowskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. WernerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API