City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg

Minnesota Supreme Court
City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg, 543 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 1996)
1996 Minn. LEXIS 57; 1996 WL 50918
Keith

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 2 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

Based upon all the flies, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the court of appeals filed October 24, 1995, answering a question certified by the district court as important and doubtful is affirmed. The district court granted VanEn-gelenburg’s motion to dismiss the criminal prosecution on double jeopardy grounds but certified the double jeopardy question to the court of appeals. The court of appeals answered the question in the negative and reversed the order dismissing the prosecution. VanEngelenburg’s double jeopardy argument is answered by our decision in State v. Hanson, 543 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 1996). The decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Alexander M. Keith Chief Justice

Reference

Full Case Name
CITY OF NEW RICHLAND v. James S. VanENGELENBURG
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published