OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

FILED Wednesday, June 4, 2025

NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.

A23-0902   State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Samuel Alejondro Torrez, Appellant.
                    Court of Appeals.
          When a defendant is charged with refusing a blood or urine test required by a search warrant in violation of Minnesota Statutes section 169A.20, subdivision 2(2) (2024), the State is not required to prove that the arresting officer had probable cause to believe the defendant was driving, operating, or in physical control of a motor vehicle while impaired.
          Affirmed. Chief Justice Natalie E. Hudson.
          Took no part, Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas.

Opinion SetsAs of June 1, 2023, the Supreme Court no longer provides opinion sets in Word Document format and Rich Text Format. Opinions are available in PDF format under the Opinions tab on this site.

Opinion Set in a Zipped PDF 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.

ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR FURTHER REVIEW

FILED Wednesday, May 28, 2025

(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)

 
Granted
 
1.         Bryce Holstad, et al. vs. Town of May – A24-1113
 
Issues Granted: (1) Whether Minn. Stat. § 164.08 grants townships “implied authority” within their use of eminent domain power to place non-statutory requirements on the establishment of a cartway, including construction, third-party regulatory approval, and payment of future attorneys’ fees.  (2) Whether a township’s establishment of a cartway fails to give meaningful access to landlocked property and is more damaging and disruptive than the requested route when it requires $1.4 million in construction in a sensitive ecological area, necessitates third-party regulatory approvals, and causes excessive burdens on the neighboring land.
 
 
2.         State of Minnesota vs. Ge Yang – A24-0228
 
Issue Granted: Is Yang entitled to a new trial on his conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct (one act penetration) because a non-unanimous verdict resulted due to the district court’s failure to provide a specific unanimity instruction that would have instructed jurors to choose between two alleged separate and distinct penetrative acts?
 
3.         State of Minnesota vs. Patrick Jay Sullivan – A23-1134
 
Issues Granted: (1) When a postconviction court enters an acquittal on the merits and vacates a criminal conviction, may that court later reinstate the conviction without running afoul of the Double Jeopardy Clause?  (2) When a testifying defendant is impeached with prior convictions but the State introduces no substantive evidence of those prior convictions, may an appellate court reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence rely on the impeachment evidence to find an element of the offense proven?
 
 
4.         Todd Robert Reihs vs. Commissioner of Public Safety – A24-0773
 
Issue Granted: Does the District Court have Subject Matter Jurisdiction under 171.19 to Review an Extension of a Driver’s License Revocation Period?
 
 
 
Grant/Vacate/Remand
 
5.         In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Nicholas Scott Thompson – A25-0117
 
Issue: Should this appeal be allowed to proceed given its unique procedural history, the constitutional ramifications, and the issues likely to be raised on appeal? 
 
 
Denied
 
6.            Daniel Briard vs. Jeffrey E. Johnson – A24-1427
7.            In re the Marriage of: Rachel Beth Fate vs. Chetan Singh Oshan – A24-0463
8.            In re the matter of: Tiffany Dust f/k/a Tiffany Dust-Chlebik vs. Beau Kevin Wayne f/k/a Kevin Chlebik – A25-0666 (Petition for Accelerated
               Review)
9.            In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Bruce Ray Fairbanks – A24-1362
10.          In the Matter of the Welfare of: C.P.M., Child – A24-0840
11.          Issiaka Isaac Traore vs. Essa Sissoho, Terra Pointe Apartments, et al. – A24-1204
12.          Jon Huseth, et al., d/b/a Clay View Dairy, LLP vs. Goodhue County Cooperative Electric Association, Kurt Emery, Respondent, DuraTech
               Industries International, Inc., Highline Manufacturing, Ltd. – A23-0307
13.          Remona Lysa Brown vs. State of Minnesota – A24-0373
14.          State of Minnesota vs. Alexander David Chaffee – A24-0904
15.          State of Minnesota vs. Antonio Harris – A24-0510
16.          State of Minnesota vs. Artshayia Monia Pargo – A24-0162
17.          State of Minnesota vs. Bryan Duane Arnesen – A24-0493
18.          State of Minnesota vs. Cassandra Anne Dusold – A23-1974
19.          State of Minnesota vs. Eniwo Daniel Udezi – A24-0348
20.          State of Minnesota vs. Gabriel Macedo – A24-0192
21.          State of Minnesota vs. Hollis John Larson – A24-0602, A24-0862
22.          State of Minnesota vs. Jacoby Jermaine Edwards – A24-0350
23.          State of Minnesota vs. Jawane Deshawn Bellazan – A24-0416
24.          State of Minnesota vs. Jerrod Richard Lewis Ash – A24-0530
25.          State of Minnesota vs. John Joseph Hare – A23-1040
26.          State of Minnesota vs. Justin Nicholas Boggs – A24-0587
27.          State of Minnesota vs. Lindsey Rose Schneeberger – A24-1002
28.          State of Minnesota vs. Marcus Devontae Harvey – A24-0825
29.          State of Minnesota vs. Max Leo Miller – A24-0205
30.          State of Minnesota vs. Romaine Temor-Lemarc Johnson – A24-0243
31.          State of Minnesota vs. Shawn Elson Randall – A24-0462
32.          State of Minnesota vs. Vincent Joseph Myslajek – A23-1832