Minnesota Supreme Court, 1977

State v. Boggess

State v. Boggess
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided April 15, 1977
253 N.W.2d 146; 312 Minn. 598 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant., Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., William B. Randall, County Atty., Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. County Atty., St. Paul, 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 1983, 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

State v. Boggess

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of aggravated robbery for his role as driver of the getaway vehicle used in the robbery and was sentenced by the trial court to a 3- to 10-year term in prison, Minn.St.1974, §§ 609.11 and 609.245. In this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant contends (1) that the evidence of his guilt was insufficient as a matter of law; (2) that the trial court improperly assumed a partisan role primarily by interfering with defense counsel’s examination of witnesses even though the prosecutor had not objected; (3) that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on flight and the use of a false name by defendant when arrested; and (4) that the prosecutor improperly introduced evidence rebutting *147the testimony of one of the defense witnesses. There is no merit to the first issue, and defendant waived his right to raise the other issues by failing to object or otherwise raise them in the court below.

Affirmed.

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