From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Feb 5, 1996
543 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 1996)

Opinion

No. C8-95-588.

February 5, 1996.


ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the court of appeals filed October 24, 1995, answering a question certified by the district court as important and doubtful is affirmed. The district court granted VanEngelenburg's motion to dismiss the criminal prosecution on double jeopardy grounds but certified the double jeopardy question to the court of appeals. The court of appeals answered the question in the negative and reversed the order dismissing the prosecution. VanEngelenburg's double jeopardy argument is answered by our decision in State v. Hanson, 543 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 1996). The decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Alexander M. Keith Chief Justice


Summaries of

City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Feb 5, 1996
543 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 1996)
Case details for

City of New Richland v. VanEngelenburg

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF NEW RICHLAND, Plaintiff, v. James S. VanENGELENBURG, Defendant

Court:Supreme Court of Minnesota

Date published: Feb 5, 1996

Citations

543 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 1996)

Citing Cases

State v. McLendon

defendant for driving under the influence of alcohol after defendant's driver's license was administratively…