Minnesota Supreme Court, 1968

State v. Tamminen

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided November 1, 1968 · Knutson, Nelson, Murphy, Peterson, Gallagher

162 N.W.2d 369; 282 Minn. 523; 1968 Minn. LEXIS 950 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

C. Paul Jones, State Public Defender, and Robert E. Oliphant, Assistant State Public Defender, for appellant., Douglas M. Head, Attorney General, Richard H. Kyle, Solicitor General, Robert W. Johnson, County Attorney, and Gerard W. Snell, Assistant County Attorney, for respondent.

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 2023, 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.

State v. Newcombe (Minn. Ct. App. 1987)
Bolstad v. State (Minn. Ct. App. 1989)
State v. Saliterman (Minn. Ct. App. 1988)
State v. Feather (Minn. 1970)
State of Minnesota v. Devin Lee Arola Johnson (Minn. Ct. App. 2023)

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a guilty plea on an information charging attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. He now claims that he was wrongfully induced to enter a plea of *524 guilty because of fear that evidence obtained by an invalid search and seizure might be used against him in a trial, an illegally obtained confession, and statements of his counsel that he would receive a much more serious sentence if he were tried and found guilty.

As in State v. Gilles, 279 Minn. 363, 157 N. W. (2d) 64, the claims of the defendant are wholly devoid of any support in the record covering proceedings at the time of his entry of plea and sentencing. This is another case in which the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial-court level by petition for postconviction relief pursuant to the Post-conviction Remedy Act, L. 1967, c. 336, Minn. St. c. 590.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.