Riggers v. State, 41659
| Decision Date | 27 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 41659,41659 |
| Citation | 169 N.W.2d 58,284 Minn. 543 |
| Parties | Loren RIGGERS, Respondent, v. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Douglas M. Head, Atty. Gen., Richard H. Kyle, Sol. Gen., St. Paul, Alfred C. Schmidt, Dist. Pros., Bemidji, for appellant.
C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, Roberta K. Levy, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for respondent.
Heard before KNUTSON, C.J., and ROGOSHESKE, SHERAN, PETERSON, and FRANK T. GALLAGHER, JJ.
Appeal from orders of the district court granting a petition for postconviction relief and thereby vacating a judgment of conviction of murder in the first degree, and granting a new trial. The order is appealable. Minn.St. 590.06.
We have frequently recognized the authority of the district court to vacate a plea of guilty in order to correct a manifest injustice. The decisions are collected in Chapman v. State, 282 Minn. 13, 162 N.W.2d 698.
Even though defendant caused the death of John Keninger in Norman County on May 2, 1936, the doubt expressed by the judge presiding at the postconviction proceedings as to whether the killing was premeditated and intentional has support in the record of those proceedings. His determination that defendant's plea of guilty to murder in the first degree was ill-advised and involuntary was reasonable in light of the evidence presented concerning his treatment upon apprehension; the circumstances under which his confession was secured; and the advice given him to plead guilty to a charge of a premeditated and intentional murder because of the confession, notwithstanding the apparent weakness of the state's case with respect to these essential elements of murder in the first degree. The 33 years' imprisonment already served by defendant would presumably satisfy any sentence which might have been imposed had he pleaded guilty to any lesser degree of the crime charged.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carlton v. State, No. A10–2061.
...that an 8–year delay did not prevent this court from reviewing the petitioner's substantive claims); Riggers v. State, 284 Minn. 543, 543–44, 169 N.W.2d 58, 59 (1969) (per curiam) (finding that a 33–year delay in bringing a postconviction petition did not preclude relief under chapter 590).......
-
Butala v. State
...delay alone did not preclude relief because the burden is on the state to establish undue prejudice by delay); Riggers v. State, 284 Minn. 543, 543-44, 169 N.W.2d 58, 59 (1969) (33-year delay did not preclude relief). Here, we see no substantive basis for denying review of appellant's petit......
-
James v. State, No. A03-489.
...delay alone did not preclude relief because the burden is on the state to establish undue prejudice by delay); Riggers v. State, 284 Minn. 543, 543-44, 169 N.W.2d 58, 59 (1969) (33-year delay did not preclude Butala v. State, 664 N.W.2d 333, 338 (Minn.2003); see also Fox v. State, 474 N.W.2......
-
Morris v. State, No. A05-1425 (Minn. App. 11/21/2006), A05-1425.
...Rairdon v. State, 557 N.W.2d 318, 322 (Minn. 1996) (nine-year delay did not preclude review on the merits); Riggers v. State, 284 Minn. 543, 543-44, 169 N.W.2d 58, 59 (1969) (33-year delay alone did not preclude relief). But a delay in filing a postconviction petition weighs against a petit......