Legal Opinion

State v. Hollins

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 12, 2009No. A08-0607PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PORITSKY, Judge. *

Appellant challenges his conviction of aiding and abetting a third-degree controlled-substance crime, asserting that the district court erred by (1) giving the jury an improper-inference instruction, and (2) allowing a police officer to testify about appellant “rolling a blunt” at the time of the sale. We affirm.

FACTS

On December 7, 2004, Scott Hoeft, a paid police informant working with Rochester police, entered a Rochester apartment and asked appellant Joseph Hollins for “a fifty,” that is, $50 worth of crack cocaine. According to Hoeft, Hollins made a telephone call…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. State v. SpreiglSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Dionte GosaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
  2. State of Minnesota v. Lawrence Craig OgrisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API