Legal Opinion

State v. Hamilton

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 16, 2002No. C2-02-381PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HANSON, Judge.

Appellant challenges the district court’s order revoking probation, arguing that the district court erred by (1) failing to make all the required Austin findings prior to revoking his probation and (2) failing to offer limited-use immunity at the revocation hearing so appellant’s testimony about the new charges could not be used against him at a trial on those charges. Because the record supports the district court’s decision to revoke appellant’s probation, and because the district court had no affirmative duty to offer appellant limited-use immunity, we affirm.

FACTS

Appel…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  2. State v. TheelCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
  3. In Re the Welfare of J.K.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
  4. State v. PhabsomphouCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Erickson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
  2. State v. LoshCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API