State v. Nelson, 44249
| Decision Date | 12 November 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 44249,44249 |
| Citation | 250 N.W.2d 816,311 Minn. 109 |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Harold C. NELSON, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, Gregory A. Gaut, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Warren Spannaus Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Gary W. Flakne, County Atty., Vernon E. Bergstrom, David W. Larson, Lee Barry, and Phoebe S. Haugen, Asst. County Attys., Minneapolis, for respondent.
Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.
In 1972 defendant, pursuant to a plea bargain negotiated by his privately retained counsel, entered a guilty plea to a charge of kidnapping for the purpose of committing indecent liberties. Minn.St. 609.25, subd. 1(2)(3). Thereafter, charges against him for sodomy, aggravated sodomy, indecent liberties, and use of drugs to facilitate commission of a crime were dismissed and defendant received a limited sentence of 10 years in prison. 1 While his direct appeal to this court was pending, defendant moved for an order remanding the case for a postconviction hearing. The postconviction court denied defendant's petition for relief. We affirm this order as well as the judgment of conviction.
Defendant's first contention is that the trial court erred in accepting his guilty plea without first interrogating him personally to establish that there was a factual basis and that the plea was voluntarily and knowingly entered. Recently, in State v. Hoaglund, Minn., 240 N.W.2d 4 (1976), we emphasized strongly that the trial court has the primary responsibility to elicit from a defendant the testimony needed to establish a proper plea. However, in State v. Nace, Minn., 241 N.W.2d 101 (1976), we reaffirmed that defendants will not be permitted to plead anew simply because the court did not elicit the testimony so long as the record contains sufficient testimony. Here, defense counsel and the prosecutor elicited sufficient testimony establishing that there was a factual basis and that the plea was voluntary.
Defendant's second contention is that the postconviction court erred in determining that the plea was freely and voluntarily entered. In reaching this determination, the court properly rejected defendant's claim that the transcript of the change of plea hearing was inaccurate. The transcript, as well as the testimony of defendant's trial counsel at the postconviction hearing, provided a sufficient evidentiary basis for the postconviction court's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ecker
...to acceptance of a guilty plea if defense counsel and the prosecutor have established an adequate factual basis. State v. Nelson, 311 Minn. 109, 110, 250 N.W.2d 816, 817 (1976). It is the responsibility of the trial judge, however, to ensure that an adequate factual basis has been establish......
-
State v. Raleigh, No. A08-2273.
...failed to elicit proper responses if the record contains sufficient evidence to support the conviction. See State v. Nelson, 311 Minn. 109, 110, 250 N.W.2d 816, 817 (1976). Raleigh challenges the accuracy of his plea on two points. First, he argues the facts do not establish the element of ......
-
Rosendahl v. State
...if the record contains sufficient evidence to support the conviction. " 778 N.W.2d at 94 (emphasis added) (citing State v. Nelson , 311 Minn. 109, 250 N.W.2d 816, 817 (1976) ).2 Though this is indeed an accurate recitation of the legal proposition, for reasons explained below, it does not a......
-
State v. Hall
...and the prosecuting attorney elicit sufficient testimony establishing the factual basis for the plea. See id. (citing State v. Nelson, 250 N.W.2d 816, 817 (Minn. 1976)). Hall pleaded guilty to first-degree burglary involving an assault, which requires the nonconsensual entry of a building a......