Legal Opinion

State v. Anderson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 31, 1927No. 26,380PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Per curiam

Appeal from a judgment.- Defendant was convicted of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor. On cross-examination he was required to testify over proper objection that he had first plead guilty to the accusation made in the information upon which he was on trial and that he thereafter withdrew such plea by leave of the court. This was error. Under such circumstances the former plea is held for naught. Kercheval v. U. S. 274 U. S. 220, 47 S. Ct. 582, 71 L. ed. 1009. A new trial is granted.

Reversed.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Kercheval v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. People v. SpitaleriNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
  2. People v. StreetMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  3. State v. ReardonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  4. State v. ThomsonOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  5. People v. GeorgeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976

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

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

Powered by the Exa API