Legal Opinion
State v. Marshall
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 19, 1995No. C7-95-1229PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KALITOWSKI, Judge.
The State of Minnesota appeals the dismissal of theft by temporary taking charges under Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subds. 2(1), 2(5) (1994) against respondent Julie Marshall.
FACTS
Marshall owned and operated Minnesota Intrusion Alarm, Inc. (MIA), a business that typically sold alarm system monitoring services to elderly customers for approximately $800 paid in advance. The contracts were usually four- to six-year agreements requiring MIA to provide alarm system monitoring. MIA provided no alarm monitoring itself, but paid subcontractor IDC to perform the monitoring. Between…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State v. JoyWashington Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. SotoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Commonwealth v. AustinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Crawford v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
- Farmers State Bank v. Sig Ellingson & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. ColemanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
- State v. LarsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- In Re the Welfare of C.P.W.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- State v. KalinowskiNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2019
- State v. PeraltaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.