State v. Henspeter

• Citation: 271 N.W. 700,199 Minn. 359
• Decision Date: 05 March 1937
• Docket Number: 31080.
• Parties: STATE v. HENSPETER.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

271 N.W. 700

199 Minn. 359

STATE v. HENSPETER.

No. 31080.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

March 5, 1937

Appeal from District Court, Otter Tail County; John A. Roeser Judge.

Orlin Henspeter was convicted of petit larceny, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court .

1. By pleading not guilty to a complaint filed in a justice court charging defendant with petit larceny, he submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court; and there was no error in denying defendant's motion to withdraw the plea.

2. The evidence sustains the conviction.

3. There was no misconduct of the trial court or of the prosecuting attorney.

Henry Nycklemoe, of Fergus Falls, and Charles A Lund, of Vining, for appellant.

Harry H. Peterson, Atty Gen., Roy C. Frank, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Wm. P. Berghuis, Co. Atty., of Fergus Falls, for the State.

HOLT Justice.

The complaining witness, on May 18, 1935, had his loaded trailer parked in the evening in front of his summer cottage in Otter Tail county. With the aid of visiting friends, he, about 9 o'clock in the evening, unloaded the heavy packages on the trailer and all entered the cottage for a visit. When the friends left at about midnight, it was noticed that the trailer was gone. It was found some 200 feet away without the tires. A few days afterwards the complaining witness discovered the tires on a Ford, parked at a creamery. The sheriff of the county was notified. They found the Ford. Defendant came up. The two tires were removed from the car and were taken with defendant to the office of a justice of the peace of the county, where the complaining witness filed a complaint charging defendant with stealing the tires of the value of $8. No warrant of arrest was issued. Defendant was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. Later he moved for leave to withdraw the plea. The motion was denied. A trial resulted in conviction. He appealed to the district court. He was convicted and appeals.

The assignments of error challenge the jurisdiction of the court; the sufficiency of the evidence; and also present misconduct of court and prosecuting attorney as ground for a new trial.

Jurisdiction is denied because defendant was apprehended without warrant and brought before the justice of the peace upon a misdemeanor charge not committed in the presence of the sheriff. But, when so brought before the justice and arraigned on a complaint then filed charging him with petit larceny, he pleaded not guilty. By so doing, he waived any irregularity in his apprehension, and submitted his person to the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace, who unquestionably has jurisdiction of the crime charged. This proposition was so clearly determined in State v. Fitzgerald, 51 Minn. 534, 53 N.W. 799, that there is no need of further discussion. The last case on the same subject is State v. Abdu, 173 Minn. 95, 216 N.W. 540. One having entered a plea to a criminal complaint has not the absolute right to withdraw the same. And no reversible error can be predicated upon the refusal of the court of permit a defendant to withdraw his plea, for the purpose of having a futile dismissal. He could have been immediately arrested upon a warrant issued on the complaint filed.

The evidence is clearly sufficient to sustain the conviction. No good purpose would be served by a discussion. The jury saw and heard the different witnesses and were in a position to correctly determine defendant's guilt. The plea that defendant was a minor did, no doubt, trouble the jury very little, for he lacked but a few months of being twenty-one years old when the offense was committed.

‘ Misconduct of the court in transgressing upon the functions of the jury’ is one assignment of error. No particular misconduct is pointed out....