Precedential OpinionsBy statute, the Court of Appeals issues a precedential (formerly called "published") opinion only in the most important and complex cases. Precedential opinions include an extensive analysis of the facts and law. They will be considered and used by courts faced with similar issues in the future, and they are published in books of caselaw found in most law libraries.

DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
FILED Monday, December 4, 2023

A23-0133   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Korwin Lucio Balsley, Appellant.
                    Redwood County District Court, Hon. Patrick R. Rohland
          A predatory crime was “previously committed or attempted to be committed,” for the purposes of enhancing a sentence under the engrained-offender statute, Minn. Stat. 609.3455, subd. 3a(a)(2), (b)(2) (2022) if it was committed or attempted to be committed before the point in time when the fact finder determines whether the criteria for sentencing as an engrained offender have been satisfied.
           Affirmed. Chief Judge Susan L. Segal.

A23-0134   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Devin Lee Arola Johnson, Appellant.
                    Hubbard County District Court, Hon. Eric P. Schieferdecker
         If a defendant argues on direct appeal that a guilty plea is invalid on the ground that it was induced by an unfulfilled promise in a plea agreement, and if the record does not clearly reveal the terms of the plea agreement, the defendant is not entitled to reversal of the conviction but retains the right to assert the claim in a post-conviction petition.
          Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Judge Matthew E. Johnson.

Nonprecedential OpinionsNonprecedential opinions (formerly called "unpublished opinions") are issued in cases that are less complicated, that involve legal issues that have already been decided in precedential opinions, or that will affect only the parties to that particular case. These opinions are usually shorter than precedential opinions, do not contain extensive discussion of the facts, and are not generally relied on by other courts to the same degree as precedential opinions.

NONPRECEDENTIAL OPINIONS
FILED Monday, December 4, 2023

Pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1 (c)

1.    A22-1421
       Jerry Arthur McDonald, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Donna Arnela McDonald, n/k/a Donna 
       Arnela Rosenblad, Respondent.
       Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Judge Renee L. Worke.
       Fillmore County District Court, Hon. Matthew J. Opat.

2.    A22-1735
       D'Jilorian D. Baker, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Diona Marie Hargrett, Respondent.
       Affirmed. Judge Kevin G. Ross.
       Olmsted County District Court, Hon. Carmaine Sturino.

3.    A22-1558
       State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Micheal Lee Cocuzzi, Appellant.
       Affirmed. Judge Kevin G. Ross.
       Dodge County District Court, Hon. Judge Jodi L. Williamson.

4.    A23-0205
       State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Abdullahi Abshir Abdullahi, Appellant.
       Affirmed. Judge Louise Dovre Bjorkman.
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Thomas J. Conley.

5.    A23-0702
       Duluth Preservation Alliance, Appellant, vs. North Creek Investors II, LLC, et al.,
       Respondents, City of Duluth, Respondent.
       Dismissed. Judge Peter M. Reyes, Jr.
       St. Louis County District Court, Hon. Eric Hylden.

6.    A23-0635
       In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: D. L. W., Legal Custodian.
       Affirmed. Judge Tracy M. Smith.
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Michelle Hatcher.

7.    A23-0481
       Sally Cooper Smith, Appellant, vs. Steven C. Piechowski, individually and dba SP Trucking,  LLC, Defendant, Northstar Materials, Inc., dba Knife
       River Materials, Respondent.
       Affirmed. Judge Diane B. Bratvold.
       Clay County District Court, Hon. Leah duCharme.

8.    A22-1671
       Donald Floyd Deeble, Jr., petitioner, Appellant, vs. Hayley Elizabeth Espelien, Respondent.
       Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Judge Randall J. Slieter.
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Theresa Couri.

9.    A23-0122
       State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Joseph John Hall, Appellant.
       Affirmed. Judge Jennifer Frisch.
       Nobles County District Court, Hon. Sherry Haley.

10.  A23-0360
       Deborah Jane Clapp, Appellant, vs. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim 
       Superintendent of Minneapolis Public Schools, et al., Respondents.
       Reversed. Judge Theodora K. Gaitas.
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Christian M. Sande.

11.  A23-0557
       Megan Guetzkow, et al., Respondents, vs. Brian John Irgens, Appellant.
       Affirmed. Judge Sarah Wheelock.
       Wright County District Court, Hon. Michele A. Davis.

12.  A23-0172
       State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Curtis Dwayne Thurston, Appellant.
       Affirmed. Judge Keala C. Ede.
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Paul Scoggin.

13.  A23-0573
       G Urban Companies, Inc., Appellant, vs. Roseville Area Schools ISD #623, Respondent.
        Affirmed. Judge Jonathan P. Schmidt.
        Ramsey County District Court, Hon. Laura Nelson.

14.  A23-0149
       Tina Marie Lund, as conservator of the Honorable Fred Karasov, Appellant, vs. Calhoun     
       Orange, Inc. d/b/a Orange Theory Fitness Minneapolis-Uptown, Respondent, Ultimate Fitness Group LLC, d/b/a Orangetheory Fitness,
       Respondent.
       Affirmed. Judge Jonathan P. Schmidt
       Concurring in part, dissenting in part, Judge Edward J. Cleary*
       Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Laura Nelson

* Retired judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10.

Order OpinionsCases that involve a few simple issues may be decided by order opinions, which include little discussion of the facts of the case and a brief analysis of the laws that are involved.

RECENT ORDER OPINIONS
December 4, 2023

NO SPECIAL RELEASE OPINIONS FILED

Opinion SetsAs of June 1, 2023, the Court of Appeals no longer provides opinion sets in Word Document format and Rich Text Format. Opinions are available in PDF format under the Opinions tabs on this site.

Opinion Sets For Opinions
Filed Monday, December 4, 2023

Opinion Set in a Zipped PDF Format

1. Click the above link.
2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
5. Open the extracted file.