State v. Broten
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 1984, 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
Minnesota statutes cited
Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- State v. Broten (Minn. 1984)
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
Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of charges of burglary and theft, Minn.Stat. §§ 609.58, subd. 2, and 609.52, subd. 2(1) (1982). Those charges were based on defendant’s role in the burglary of a Roseau store on April 5, 1980. The trial court sentenced defendant to a year and a day in prison but stayed execution of the sentence. On this appeal defendant raises issues relating to the adequacy of the complaint, alleged misconduct of the sheriff’s office before trial, alleged failure of the prosecutor to follow the discovery rules, and alleged misconduct by the prosecutor in his closing statement to the jury. The record on appeal not only fails to support any of these contentions but compels the conclusion that defendant was
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.