Supreme Court Opinions


Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.

Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail.  All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately.  Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address.  Please go to the Clerk of Appellate Courts page for instructions how to register your e-mail address.


Please visit the Minnesota State Law Library's Appellate Opinions Archive for previously published Supreme Court Opinions.


FILED Wednesday, August 26, 2015


A13-0821     State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Thomas Raymond Struzyk, Appellant.
                      Court of Appeals.
           1.   Under the plain language of Minn. Stat. § 609.2231, subd. 1 (2014), the offense of felony fourth-degree assault of a peace officer (transfer of bodily fluids) requires proof of a physical assault.
           2.   Because the intentional act of throwing or transferring bodily fluid at or onto an officer, in itself, is not the crime of felony fourth-degree assault of a peace officer, the district court erred by failing to include the element of “physical assault” in its instructions to the jury.
           Reversed and remanded.  Justice Wilhelmina M. Wright.
           Concurring, Justice David R. Stras.

A14-0942     State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Kemen Lavatos Taylor, II, Appellant.
                      Hennepin County.
           1.   The district court’s requirement that members of the public display photographic identification in order to attend appellant’s trial did not constitute a partial courtroom closure.
           2.   Assuming without deciding that the district court’s exclusion of certain evidence supporting an alternative motive of accomplice witnesses was erroneous, the error was harmless.
           3.   Assuming without deciding that the district court’s admission of gang expert testimony identifying appellant as a gang member was erroneous, the error was harmless.
           4.   The district court’s jury instructions on aiding and abetting liability were not plainly erroneous. 
           5.   The district court’s failure to give a limiting instruction sua sponte regarding appellant’s prior convictions was not plainly erroneous.
           6.   The district court did not violate appellant’s right to a speedy trial.
           7.   The district court’s admission into evidence of a handwritten note seized from appellant’s jail cell was not erroneous.
           8.   Appellant waived review of whether the admission into evidence of jail call recordings was erroneous, as the briefing was inadequate and there was no obviously prejudicial error.
           9.   The cumulative effect of the two assumed errors did not deprive appellant of a fair trial.
           Affirmed.  Justice David L. Lillehaug.
           Dissenting, Justice Alan C. Page.

A14-1399      State of Minnesota, Appellant, vs. Miranda Lynn Jones, Respondent.
                      Court of Appeals.
           A willful violation of a term of probation is not, standing alone, a violation of a “mandate of a court” that subjects a probationer to criminal contempt under Minn. Stat. § 588.20, subd. 2(4) (2014).
           Affirmed.  Justice David L. Lillehaug.

A15-0567     In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Todd Allen Duckson, a Minnesota
                      Attorney, Registration No. 219125.
                      Supreme Court.
           Indefinitely suspended.  Justice Alan C. Page.



Opinion SetsOpinion sets contain all opinions and orders. The sets are compressed into files that must be unpacked before opening them.

Opinion Sets For Opinions
Filed Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Opinion Set in a Zipped Word Document Format

  1. Click the above link.
  2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
  3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
  4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
  5. Open the extracted file.

Opinion Set in a Zipped Rich Text Format

  1. Click the above link.
  2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
  3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
  4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
  5. Open the extracted file.


FILED Wednesday, June 17, 2015

ADM10-8005            Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct.
                                Supreme Court.
           Order amending rule 7.3(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct effective June 11, 2015.


FILED Tuesday, August 25, 2015

1.        Margaret Burrell Hall, successor in interest to Robert L. Hall, decedent vs. Barbara Jeanne Hall f/k/a
           Barbara Jeanne Barry, et al.
, Cottages of Vadnais Heights, LLC, Defendant – A14-1516 – Denied
2.        In re the Marriage of:  Carrie Marie Lauderdale vs. Scott James Lauderdale – A14-0864 – Denied
3.        Christina Wagner vs. Mark Sowl – A14-1997 – Denied
4.        State of Minnesota vs. Jiyaad Jamaal Copeland – A14-0932 – Denied
5.        State of Minnesota vs. Ricardo Leonard Bowman – A14-0991 – Denied
6.        Matthew Allan White vs. Commissioner of Public Safety – A14-1223 – Denied
7.        State of Minnesota vs. Bradley James Richards – A14-0707 – Denied
8.        State of Minnesota vs. Bob Matt Jaschke – A14-1867 – Denied
9.        In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of:  Gary George Spicer. – A15-0056 – Denied
10.      State of Minnesota vs.  Leslie Lindsey Treadwell – A14-0512 – Denied
11.      In re the Matter of:  A.B., Wayne Belisle, et al. vs. Yana Verzhbitskaya – A14-1656 – Denied
12.      Richard O. Erickson, et al. vs. Neatons’ Crane Service, Inc., Capstone Homes, Inc.,
           Defendant, and Neatons’ Crane Service, Inc., et al., Third Party Plaintiffs, vs. Schmidt
           Industries, Inc., Third Party Defendant – A14-1368 – Denied
13.      Gholamreza Kian, Trustee for the Next of Kin of Sean Kian, Decedent vs. City of Minnetonka, et al. –
           A14-1624 – Denied
14.      State of Minnesota vs. Paris Pierre Pollard – A14-1087 – Denied
15.      State of Minnesota vs. Delbert Keith Sybrandt – A14-0873 – Denied
16.      Jon P. Hanbury, individually and as father and natural guardian of Andrew and Nick Hanbury vs. American 
           Family Mutual Insurance Company – A14-1746 – Denied
17.      State of Minnesota vs. Kunta Kinta Viverette – A14-1377 – Denied
18.      In re the Matter of:   Kristin Holly Scherman, on behalf of minor child, A.S. vs. Tad Gregory Scherman –
            A14-1029 – Denied
19.      James P. Thommes vs. Honeywell International, Inc. – A14-1818 – Denied
20.      Somlith Vongphasouk vs. State of Minnesota – A14-1400 – Denied
21.      In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of:  D.A.J. and C.A., Parents.
           A15-0221 – Denied (8-19-15)