Minnesota Supreme Court, 1995

State v. Tildahl

State v. Tildahl
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided December 5, 1995 · Keith
540 N.W.2d 514; 1995 Minn. LEXIS 1038; 1995 WL 739869 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

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 2015, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision

Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.

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. Tildahl

Minnesota statutes cited

Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.

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

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of Melvin Clifford Tildahl for further review of the decision of the Court of Appeals filed November 7, 1995 be, and the same is, granted for the limited purpose of reversing the unpublished decision of the court of appeals affirming the imposition of multiple and consecutive jail terms for offenses of aggravated driving violation and open bottle violation. The issue is whether *515the protection of Minn.Stat. § 609.035 against multiple punishment for multiple offenses committed as part of a single behavioral incident applies and allows the imposition of only one sentence. Our disposition of this issue is controlled by City of Moorhead v. Miller, 295 N.W.2d 548 (Minn. 1980), holding in that case that the defendant could be sentenced for only one of the two offenses, which were violating the open bottle law and driving while under the influence. Since the statute applies, petitioner is entitled to vacation of one of the two sentences. Petitioner’s convictions are affirmed but he is entitled to vacation of one of the sentences. Accordingly, we remand to the district court with instructions to vacate one of the two sentences, which in this case will be the un-served sentence.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Alexander M. Keith Chief Justice

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