Legal Opinion
State v. Ahmed
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided November 23, 2010No. Nos. A10-806, A10-1156Published
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HARTEN, Judge.*
Appellants were each charged with fifth-degree controlled substance crime. They moved to dismiss the charges on the ground that the substance in their possession was not a controlled substance; their motions were denied. Each appellant then waived his right to a jury trial and submitted his case on stipulated facts to the district court, which found each of them guilty. They now challenge their convictions in appeals that were consolidated for hearing by this court. Because we see no error in the district court finding that appellants are guilty as charged, we affirm.
FACT…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do VegetalSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Western & Southern Life Ins. Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- United States v. Ali Ahmed SheikhCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.