43748 Precedential Affirmed Processed

State v. Prince

Minnesota Supreme Court · Filed April 20, 1973 · 206 N.W.2d 660

Cited by

State of Minnesota v. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State v. Jama 923 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 2019
State v. Stevenson 656 N.W.2d 235 Minn. 2003

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

State v. Peery 224 Minn. 346

Opinion text

Per Curiam. Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of indecent exposure. Minn. St. 617.23. His contention is that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, established that defendant stood completely naked in the doorway of.his home and attracted the attention of three passing high school girls by saying, “Hi, girls.” The evidence that defendant endeavored to attract the attention of passers-by while standing nude in plain sight of the passers-by was clearly sufficient, under principles enunciated in State v. Peery, 224 Minn. 346 , 28 N. W. 2d 851 (1947), to justify the verdict. Affirmed.