51558 Precedential Affirmed Processed

State v. Kline

Minnesota Supreme Court · Filed June 5, 1981 · 306 N.W.2d 132

Cited by

State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
State v. Lory 559 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
State v. Atkins 543 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1996
State v. Washington 521 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1994
State v. Gravley 359 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Stokes 354 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Rose 353 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Cermak 350 N.W.2d 328 Minn. 1984
State v. Russell 330 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1983
State v. Stufflebean 329 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 1983
State v. Dooley 319 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1982

Opinion text

*133 WAHL, Justice. Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of aiding and abetting the commission of an aggravated robbery, Minn.Stat. §§ 609.05 and 609.245 (1978), and was sentenced by the trial court to a limited maximum prison term of ten years. Issues raised by defendant on this appeal from judgment of conviction relate to the sufficiency of the evidence that he knowingly and intentionally aided in the commission of the robbery and to the fairness of the prosecutor’s closing argument. No useful purpose would be served by summarizing the evidence against defendant. It is sufficient to say that our examination of the record satisfies us that the evidence of defendant’s guilt was sufficient. We do not consider the issue of the propriety of the prosecutor’s closing argument, because defendant, by failing to object or seek curative instructions, is deemed to have forfeited his right to have the issue considered on appeal. Affirmed.