Jane Doe 136 v. Ralph Liebsch
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentLillehaug, Justice
For almost 40 years we have allowed Minnesota defendants to plead guilty to .crimes while they simultaneously’ deny their guilt — by what we know as Alford pleas. Whatever the wisdom of that judicial policy, it has been black-letter law that an Alford plea may be used for the samé *884purposes as a conventional guilty plea. But today, in a subsequent civil suit based on the same incident of alleged criminal sexual conduct, the court departs from this rule of law, prompting my respectful dissent. Because the district court fundamentally erred on the legal effect of an Alford plea, thereby keeping…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Nelson M. Blohm and Joann M. Blohm v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Hudson v. Snyder Body, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Clark v. BainesWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. GouletteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.