Supreme Court Opinions


IMPORTANT NOTICE

Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.

Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail.  All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately.  Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address.  Please go to the Clerk of Appellate Courts page for instructions how to register your e-mail address.
 

PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Please visit the Minnesota State Law Library's Appellate Opinions Archive for previously published Supreme Court Opinions.

NOTE: If you are having trouble accessing the tabs on your mobile device, you may view all Opinions and Orders on a single page.


OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

FILED Wednesday, April 30, 2025

NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.


A23-0158   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte, Appellant.
                    Court of Appeals.
          1. To “lewdly” expose oneself in violation of Minnesota Statutes section 617.23, subdivision 1(1) (2024), a person must engage in conduct of a sexual nature.
          2. The State did not present evidence sufficient to prove that the appellant “lewdly” exposed her “body, or the private parts thereof” under section 617.23, subdivision 1(1), because the record does not show that the appellant engaged in conduct of a sexual nature.
          Reversed. Justice Karl C. Procaccini.
          Concurring, Justice Sarah E. Hennesy, Justice Karl C. Procaccini.
          Took no part, Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas.


A21-0070   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Larry Joe Foster, Appellant.
A21-0583    Court of Appeals.
          1. Appellant did not properly preserve the question of whether a defendant, who has satisfied the required test to present an alternative perpetrator defense, is entitled to call the alternative perpetrator to appear before the jury for a nontestimonial purpose.
          2. When a defendant has satisfied the required test to present an alternative perpetrator defense, a district court has discretion under the ordinary rules of evidence to allow the defendant to call the alternative perpetrator as a trial witness, even when it is known that the alternative perpetrator will invoke their right against self-incrimination in the presence of the jury.
          3. The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied appellant’s request to call an alternative perpetrator to the witness stand based on needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
          Affirmed. Justice Karl C. Procaccini.
          Concurring, Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas, Chief Justice Natalie E. Hudson.


A24-0454   Rodney Dean Bjornson, Relator, vs. McNeilus Companies, Inc. and Travelers Indemnity Company of America and Property & Casualty
                    Insurance Company of Hartford with claims administered by Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc., Respondents.
                   Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals.
          The Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals must assess whether there is evidence in the record that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a compensation judge's determination that an employee's attorney recovered an ascertainable dollar amount of medical benefits under Minn. Stat. § 176.081, subd. 1(a) (2024).
          Reversed and remanded. Justice Sarah E. Hennesy.

A24-0930   Leroy Roderick Paul, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.
                    Hennepin County.
          The district court did not abuse its discretion when it summarily denied appellant’s petition for postconviction relief because, even accepting the evidence presented in support of the petition as true, appellant was conclusively entitled to no relief.
          Affirmed. Justice Sarah E. Hennesy.
          Took no part, Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas.

 
ORDERS
 
A24-0056   Ashcel Companies, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, Appellant, vs. County of Dodge, Respondent.
          Dismissed. Chief Justice Natalie E. Hudson.

A24-1527   In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Zaylore S. Stout, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0392929.
          Suspended. Justice Gordon L. Moore, III.

A24-1106   In re Petition for Reinstatement of Daniel Miller, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0125544.
          Reinstated. Justice Gordon L. Moore, III.

A24-0859   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Diamond Lee Jamal Griffin, Appellant.
          Jurisdiction Accepted. Per Curiam.
Opinion SetsAs of June 1, 2023, the Supreme Court no longer provides opinion sets in Word Document format and Rich Text Format. Opinions are available in PDF format under the Opinions tab on this site.

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.

ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR FURTHER REVIEW

FILED Wednesday, April 23, 2025


(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)

POSTED THURSDAY AFTER SPECIAL TERM CONFERENCE
(Issues are as Presented in the Petition for Review)
 
 
Denied
 
1.             Allan N. Anderson, Jr., et al. vs. Westrock Minnesota Corporation f/k/a Waldorf Corporation – A24-0914
2.             Demetreious Anderson Baldwin vs. State of Minnesota – A24-0556, A24-0593
3.             Earl Lionell Ward vs. State of Minnesota – A24-0865
4.             In re Sina Roughani, State of Minnesota vs. Sina Roughani – A24-2042
5.             In the Matter of the Welfare of: D.C.D., Child – A24-0595
6.             Paul Casey Mason vs. State of Minnesota – A24-1074
7.             Sandra Kay Brown vs. Erik James Klein – A24-0238
8.             State of Minnesota vs. Anthony James Moore – A23-1841
9.             State of Minnesota vs. Harold Ladell Williams – A24-0156
10.           State of Minnesota vs. Malik Deshone Williams – A23-1598
11.           State of Minnesota vs. Nickolas John May – A24-0889
12.           State of Minnesota vs. Richard Preston Blackwell – A24-0311
13.           State of Minnesota vs. Shawn Michael Manton – A24-1071
14.           William O. Bradley vs. For Life Home Development LLC – A24-0813
15.           Zutz Farms, et al. vs. Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District, Christian Erickson – A24-0352