Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Owens, 129 N.W.2d 284.

25 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
was not cited in the [charging document]”); (“The offense charged in an indictment is determined by the facts alleged and not necessarily by the name by which it is designated.”).
State v. Sherbrooke 633 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Sherbrooke 633 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321, 325
State v. Alexander 185 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1971
State v. Alexander 185 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1971
Webber v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 302 , 152 N. W. (2d) 497 ; and State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 , is misguided.
State v. Dinneen 184 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1971
State v. Dinneen 184 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1971
State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 .
Hayes v. State 169 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 1969
Hayes v. State 169 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 1969
Masters v. Tahash, 266 Minn. 348 , 123 N. W. (2d) 600 ; State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 ; State v. Clark, 268 Minn. 429 , 131 N. W. (2d) 204 ; State v. Lehn, 270 Minn. 503 , 134 N. W. (2d) 329 ; *546 and State v. Clark, 270 Minn. 538 , 134 N. W. (2d) 857 .
State v. Britt 156 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1968
State v. Britt 156 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1968
If it accomplishes that purpose, we think our statutes, as well as the case law of this state, require that we hold the information [or indictment] sufficient.” “The offense charged in an indictment,” we said in State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321, 325 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284, 287 , “is determined by the facts alleged and not necessarily by the name by which it is designated.” In State v. Mancino, 257 Minn. 580 , 102 N. W. (2d) 504, 505 , we held, pertinent to this case, that an indictment or information
State v. Pratt 152 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 1967
State v. Pratt 152 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 1967
7 State v. Clark, supra; State v. Lehn, 270 Minn. 503 , 134 N. W. (2d) 329 ; State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 ; State v. Clark, 268 Minn. 429 , 131 N. W. (2d) 204 ; State ex rel.
State ex rel. Owens v. Tahash 143 N.W.2d 49 Minn. 1966
State ex rel. Owens v. Tahash 143 N.W.2d 49 Minn. 1966
Upon appeal to this court, we affirmed the conviction in State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 .
State Ex Rel. Schwirtz v. Tahash 141 N.W.2d 811 Minn. 1966
State Ex Rel. Schwirtz v. Tahash 141 N.W.2d 811 Minn. 1966
5 See, also, State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 ; State ex rel.
State v. Schultz 136 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1965
State v. Schultz 136 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1965
See, State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 ; State v. Clark, 268 Minn. 429 , 131 N. W. (2d) 204 ; State ex rel.
State v. Clark 134 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1965
State v. Clark 134 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1965
Masters v. Tahash, 266 Minn. 348 , 123 N. W. (2d) 600 ; State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 ; State v. Clark, 268 Minn. 429 , 131 N. W. (2d) 204 ; and State v. Lehn, 270 Minn. 503 , 134 N. W. (2d) 329 .
State v. Lehn 134 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1965
State v. Lehn 134 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1965
In State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 , we held that the citation of an inapplicable statute in an indictment or information will be treated as mere surplusage when first raised on appeal unless it appears that the defendant was misled or prejudiced.
State v. Clark 131 N.W.2d 204 Minn. 1964
State v. Clark 131 N.W.2d 204 Minn. 1964
The same question raised here has been settled since this appeal was brought by this court’s opinion in State v. Owens, 268 Minn. 321 , 129 N. W. (2d) 284 .