State v. Anderson
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 found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of simple robbery, Minn.Stat. § 609.24 (1980), and was sentenced by the trial court to 30 months in prison, which is the presumptive sentence established by the Sentencing Guidelines for this offense by a defendant with a criminal history score of three. On this appeal from judgment of conviction defendant contends that the evidence identifying him as the robber was legally insufficient and that he was denied a fair trial by the admission of certain evidence showing prior misconduct on his part. There is no merit to either contention. The victim positively identified defendant as the robber and there was strong corroborating evidence that defendant’s car was used in the robbery and police found a toy gun in defendant’s jacket similar to that used by the robber. The evidence to which defendant now objects was evidence which his own counsel elicited, apparently deliberately.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.