State v. Horton
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 was charged with attempted second degree murder and with assault in the first degree but, after a jury trial, was found guilty only of the latter offense, Minn.Stat. § 609.221 (1980). The trial court sentenced defendant to 10 years in prison. Issues raised by defendant on his appeal from judgment of conviction are: (1) whether the evidence of his guilt was legally insufficient, and (2) whether the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress statements defendant made to police in his house and later when he was in custody. We affirm.
Our examination of the records satisfies us that there was sufficient evidence of defendant’s guilt and that he did not act in self-defense, as he claimed at trial.
The trial court did not clearly err in determining that the on-the-scene questioning of defendant which preceded the giving of the Miranda warning was noncustodial. State v. Palm, 299 N.W.2d 740 (Minn. 1980); State v. Bekkerus, 297 N.W.2d 136 (Minn. 1980). The subsequent custodial interrogation of defendant fully complied with all relevant constitutional requirements.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.