State v. Sperl
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) Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Minnesota statutes cited
Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.
Opinion of the Court
Defendant, who was charged with felony theft (theft of more than $100), Minn.Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(1), 3(2) (1974), was found guilty by a district court jury of the lesser-included offense of misdemeanor theft (theft of $100 or less), § 609.52, subd. 3(5). The trial court has stayed imposition of sentence pending the outcome of this appeal by defendant. Issues raised by defendant relate to the sufficiency of the evidence and the propriety of the trial court’s submitting the lesser offense over defense counsel’s objection. We affirm.
There is no merit to defendant’s contention that the evidence of his guilt was legally insufficient. Defendant’s other contention basically is that a defendant ought to be able to prevent submission of lesser offenses. We have rejected this contention in a number of cases, most recently in State v. Schluter, 281 N.W.2d 174 (Minn. 1979). We again do so in this case.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.