Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Ferguson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 11, 2012No. A10-0540Published

1Dissent

ANDERSON, PAUL H., Justice

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent. I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that a drive-by shooting at an occupied building is a victimless crime; rather, I conclude that all of the occupants of the targeted building are victims. Moreover, even if the majority is correct that the building’s occupants were not victims, I disagree with the majority’s assumption that the multiple-victim exception applies to a victimless crime. It does not. Therefore, I would affirm the result reached by the court of appeals.

Michael James Ferguson was convicted on one count of aiding…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. State v. WhittakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  2. State v. BookwalterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
  3. State v. HerbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. State v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
  5. State Ex Rel. Stangvik v. TahashSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968

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

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

Powered by the Exa API