State v. Kallestad

Per Curiam. These are consolidated appeals from a conviction for taking indecent liberties in violation of Minn. St. 609.296, subd. 1(2), and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. He was tried without a jury and sentenced to a term not exceeding 4 years in prison. After being committed for approximately 7 weeks, he was released on bail pending the disposition of this appeal. A number of issues are raised by defendant. The principal thrust of his appeal is the claim that his guilt has not been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt. A thorough consideration of the record by this court sitting en banc leads us to the conclusion that the interests of justice require a new trial. We are conscious of the need for restraint in reversing criminal convictions. State v. Kemp, 272 Minn. 447, 450 , 138 N. W. 2d 610, 612 (1965). Nevertheless, where we entertain grave doubts as to defendant's guilt, it is our duty to grant a new trial. State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 375 , 152 N. W. 2d 529, 533 (1967). As we suggested in State v. Boyce, 284 Minn. 242, 261 , 170 N. W. 2d 104, 116 (1969), upon a retrial defendant may wish to submit the issues to a jury. Reversed and remanded for a new trial.