State v. Zenzen
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1978, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re the Welfare of C. W. S. (Minn. 1978)
- Appeal of O'Rourke (Minn. 1974)
- Stolp v. Scrimshaw (Minn. 1974)
- In re Santillanes (N.M. 1943)
- Bringgold v. Bringgold (Minn. 1932)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
In this case a 16-year old girl was adjudged to be a delinquent child and she was ordered committed to the Hennepin County Home School for Girls until the further order of the court. The appeal is from an order denying a new trial. May a review be had by appeal ?
Juvenile delinquents are not criminals. Peterson v. McAuliffe, 151 Minn. 467, 187 N. W. 226; G. S. 1923, § 8636, as amended, 2 Mason, 1927, id. Proceedings involving juvenile delinquents are had pursuant to G. S. 1923, c. 73A, as amended, 2 Mason, 1927, id. which fails to provide for an appeal. The legislature did not give that right. Unless such right is given expressly or by implication, it does not exist. It is not an inherent right. The right of appeal was unknown to the common law. Perhaps the legislature did not consider an appeal necessary. In such a proceeding the state intervenes primarily in the interest of the child and secondarily in the interest of society. The act does not provide machinery, for guard *395 ing the interest of the child upon an appeal. We think the character of the proceeding and the language of the statute lead to the conclusion that there is no appeal. The authorities so hold. 31 C. J. 1109; Van Leuven v. Ingham Circuit Judge, 166 Mich. 115, 131 N. W. 531; Dinson v. Drosta, 39 Ind. App. 432, 80 N. E. 32; Marlowe v. Commonwealth, 142 Ky. 106, 133 S. W. 1137; State v. Bockman, 139 Tenn. 422, 201 S. W. 741; People v. Piccolo, 275 Ill. 453, 114 N. E. 145; Fowler v. Fowler, 24 Cal. App. 529, 141 P. 1053; Ex parte Bartee, 76 Tex. Cr. 285, 174 S. W. 1051; Cullins v. Williams, 156 Ky. 57, 160 S. W. 733. Certiorari may be available. State ex rel. Williams v. Juvenile Court, 163 Minn. 312, 204 N. W. 21. Habeas corpus may be available. Peterson v. McAuliffe, 151 Minn. 467, 187 N. W. 226.
Appeal dismissed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.