Legal Opinion

Finnegan v. State

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 5, 2009No. A08-0777PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WORKE, Judge.

On appeal from the denial of a postcon-viction-relief petition challenging his first-degree criminal-sexual-conduct conviction, appellant argues that the district court abused its discretion in ruling that (1) he voluntarily absented himself from trial after he was hospitalized for a drug overdose and that it was proper to conduct his trial in absentia, and (2) the prosecutor did not commit prejudicial misconduct in closing argument. Because the record supports the finding that appellant voluntarily absented himself by attempting suicide, we conclude that appellant waived…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. State v. RameySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  2. State v. StrommenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  3. United States v. Frederick Charles Latham, Jr.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
  4. State v. GasslerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  5. State v. PorterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. FinneganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  2. Peacock v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  3. State v. FinneganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  4. State v. SidesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API