Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Lawrence, 312 N.W.2d 251.

37 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Concealment “is not limited to its literal meaning of hiding or secreting property but includes conduct which converts the property to the defendant’s use or renders its discovery more difficult by the owner.”
Minn. 2023
–07 (Minn. 2018); (holding that possession of a firearm by an ineligible person is a continuing offense); (holding that “concealing or possessing stolen goods” is a continuing offense); (holding that “[e]scape is a continuing offense”); State v. Clark, 182 N.W.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A crime is not continuing unless the legislature clearly so indicates, (citing Toussie v. United States, 397 U.S. 112, 115, 90 S. Ct. 858, 860 (1970)), or the nature of the offense is such that the legislature “must assuredly have intended that it be treated as a continuing one.” Toussie, 397 U.S. at 115, 90 S. Ct. at 860.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
As a general rule, “a crime is not continuing in nature if not clearly so indicated by the legislature.” State v. Lawrence , (citing Toussie v. United States , 397 U.S. 112, 115, 90 S. Ct. 858, 860 (1970)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
7 The use of the word “possessing” in a criminal statute is intended to “denote a continuing offense.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Lawrence , d 251, 253-54 (Minn. 1981); see also Black’s Law Dictionary 1186 (9th ed. 2009) (defining “continuing offense” as “[a] crime .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
And the state fails to mention State v. Lawrence, which teaches, “[A] crime is not continuing in nature if not clearly so indicated by the legislature.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See State v. Lawrence , d 251, 253 –54 (Minn. 1981).
State v. Washington 908 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 2018
State v. Washington 908 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 2018
See e.g., State v. Banks , , 494 (Minn. 1983) (holding that possession of a firearm by an ineligible person is a continuing offense); State v. Lawrence , , 253 (Minn. 1981) (holding that "concealing or possessing stolen goods" is a continuing offense); State v. Burnett , 292 Minn. 484 , , 189 (1972) (holding that "escape is a continuing offense"); State v. Clark , 148 Minn. 389 , 182 N.W.
State v. Washington 894 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Washington 894 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
see also State v. O’Hagan, review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
(discussing the continuing-crime doctrine).
State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Bakken 883 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Bakken 883 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2016
Although a crime of possession is a continuing offense, it is complete when the offender takes possession of the prohibited item, see Bauer, d at 828-29 (concluding that a possession offense and a controlled-substance-sale offense were committed at different times because the possession, though continuing, was completed before the sale offen
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David A. OVERBOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 83318 867 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 2015
In Re Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST David A. OVERBOE, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 83318 867 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 2015
(refusing to dismiss a disciplinary investigation based on an unreasonable delay because the attorney failed to show prejudice from the delay); (concluding that due process may be violated if a preaccusation delay causes actual and substantial prejudice).
State v. Peterson 764 N.W.2d 816 Minn. 2009
State v. Peterson 764 N.W.2d 816 Minn. 2009
Longoria v. State 749 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Longoria v. State 749 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Appellant cites caselaw stating that “a crime is not continuing in nature if not clearly so indicated by the legislature.”
State v. Lee 683 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2004
State v. Lee 683 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2004
State v. O'HAGAN 474 N.W.2d 613 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. O'HAGAN 474 N.W.2d 613 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
In Minnesota, “possessing stolen property and concealing stolen property are continuing offenses for the purpose of the statute of limitations.” (concealing or possessing stolen property is a continuing offense for the purposes of the statute of limitations).
State v. Abu-Shanab 448 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Abu-Shanab 448 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
129 (D.Oregon 1980) (offense involving illegal possession of property a continuing offense); (concealing or possessing stolen goods is a continuing offense, since goods remain stolen).
State v. Fernow 354 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1984
State v. Fernow 354 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1984
in which we held that possessing stolen property and concealing stolen property are continuing offenses for the purpose of the statute of limitations.
State v. Hines 354 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Hines 354 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Danielski 348 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Danielski 348 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
However, supports the view that the statute of limitations should not be applied in this case.
State, Department of Public Safety v. Rice 323 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1982
State, Department of Public Safety v. Rice 323 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1982