Skip to main content

Johnson v. State

Citations

  • 801 N.W.2d 173
  • 2011 Minn. LEXIS 465
  • 2011 WL 3477054

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that plain language of the rule does not allow a defendant to challenge his conviction
  • concluding that offender’s claim was not proper under rule 27.03, subdivision 9, and reviewing as petition for postconviction relief
  • concluding that the “plain language” of rule 27.03, subdivision 9, “does not allow a defendant to challenge his conviction”
  • stating that “the plain language of [rule 27.03, subdivision 9,] does not allow a defendant to challenge his conviction”
  • noting that a challenge to a conviction may not be brought under rule 27.03, subdivision 9, which is limited to sentencing issues
  • stating that because the defendant had not argued that a petition for postconviction relief would be inadequate or ineffective, his exclusive remedy was a petition for postconviction relief, not a Rule 27.03 motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Meyer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.