State v. Collins

• Decision Date: 24 December 1964
• Docket Number: 39555,39517,Nos. 39516,s. 39516
• Citation: State v. Collins, 270 Minn. 581, 132 N.W.2d 802 (Minn. 1964)
• Parties: STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Gerald P. COLLINS, Appellant.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 802

132 N.W.2d 802

270 Minn. 581

STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Gerald P. COLLINS, Appellant.

Nos. 39516, 39517, 39555.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Dec. 24, 1964.

Walter F. Mondale, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, George M. Scott, County Atty., Gerard W. Snell, Asst. County Atty., Minneapolis, for respondent.

Joseph Robbie, Minneapolis, for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant is presently confined in the State Prison at Stillwater pending an appeal from an order denying his motion for a new trial made after he was convicted of the crime of aggravated robbery which occurred on December 8, 1963. The appeal in that case (No. 39691) is not affected by the disposition of the matter now before us.

Although defendant has been charged with being a participant in a supermarket robbery which occurred March 1, 1963, there has been no trial for this offense. In State v. Collins, 267 Minn. 550, 125 N.W.2d 587, defendant's appeal from a bindover order made at the conclusion of his preliminary hearing was dismissed as nonappealable. He then moved in the district court for an order suppressing certain evidence obtained as the product of a search of an automobile, owned by his mother but in his possession with her permission when he was taken into custody near the scene of the March 1 robbery. In addition, he twice petitioned the District Court of Hennepin County for habeas corpus, once on the theory that but for the seized evidence the state has no basis for involving him in the supermarket robbery and again on the theory that an indictment returned after appeals were taken to this court was a nullity. This latter theory also motivated a motion to quash the indictment.

From the printed record it appears that there are three appeals pending in this court. One is from an order denying a motion to suppress evidence (No. 39516). Another is from an order denying a motion to dismiss and discharging a writ of habeas corpus (No. 39517). The third is from an order denying a motion to dismiss and quash an indictment and discharging a writ of habeas corpus (No. 39555). We construe a motion filed by the state on July 29, 1964, as being for dismissal of all three of the appeals or, in the alternative, for dismissal of such of the appeals as do not involve habeas corpus and a disposition of the orders discharging the writs. Defendant, in responding to this motion, gives similar interpretation to the position of the state.

1. Except for the orders discharging the writs of habeas corpus, the orders from which appeals have been taken are nonappealable. See, Minn.St. 632.01 and cases cited in State v. Collins, supra.

2. The orders of the district court discharging defendant's application for a writ of habeas corpus are appealable. Minn.St. 589.29. We are able to dispose of these matters without the necessity of oral argument.

2a. The record before the district court in connection with the habeas corpus proceedings includes testimony taken from officers of the Minneapolis Police Department in proceedings before the municipal court in the city of Minneapolis conducted on and after March 21, 1963, from which the following facts appear:

At about 11:15 a.m., on March 1, 1963, defendant Collins, accompanied by one Gittelson, was halted at Lyndale Avenue near 24th Street by Officers Clifford Revak and Jerry Torrey of the Minneapolis Police Department, who had been notified of the robbery by police radio. The officers stopped the two men in part because their appearance, and that of the Chevrolet automobile in which they were riding, conformed to a limited degree to the broadcast description of the suspects; in part because the place where and the time when they were observed was proximate to the place and time of the robbery; and in part because of the manner in which they reacted to the appearance of the police car before being stopped.

Preliminary interrogation of the suspects produced answers which were evasive and inconsistent. The two were taken to the nearby supermarket where the robbery had occurred and Gittelson was positively identified by the store manager as being one of the robbers. The record is vague as to whether any identification was made of Collins at this time, but we assume that positive identification was not secured. In any event, both Collins and Gittelson were then taken to police headquarters where they were booked at about 12:15 p.m.

At the place where the Chevrolet was stopped, Collins claimed that he had no key for the trunk. The Chevrolet vehicle remained at Lyndale Avenue and 24th Street until approximately 1 p.m., at which time the trunk...