State v. Schneider
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.
2Per curiam
This is an appeal by defendant from a judgment of conviction of driving while under the influence, Minn. St. 169.121. Defendant contends that he should receive a new trial because (1) the trial court abused its discretion in permitting the state’s two witnesses, both peace officers, to express their opinions that defendant was under the influence, and (2) the prosecutor in his closing argument improperly alluded to defendant’s failure to testify in his own behalf. We affirm.
1. The trial court has broad discretion in determining the…
3Cases cited3 opinions
- Anderson v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Bisbee v. RuppertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- State v. HicksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
4Cited by12 opinions
- State v. WhittakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. ClarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. FogartySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1981
- Holtz v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1983
- Rude v. Commissioner of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.