State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash

11 Citing cases

  1. State v. Madson

    142 N.W.2d 724 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 2 times

    Where there is nothing in the record to indicate that defendant's conversations or statements during the ordinary investigative process conducted by the police officers were the results of coercions, threats, or promises on the part of the officers, we hold that the trial court did not err in failing to exclude them under the facts and circumstances here. State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692, controlling. Appeal by Robert Earl Madson from a judgment of the Crow Wing County District Court, John T. Galarneault, Judge, whereby he was convicted of burglary.

  2. State v. Kroeplin

    266 N.W.2d 537 (N.D. 1978)   Cited 17 times
    In Kroeplin, the defendant contended in part that trial counsel's failure to initiate pretrial motions for the suppression of physical evidence denied her effective assistance of counsel.

    A motion for judgment of acquittal made by counsel at trial could not have been properly granted by the court; therefore, counsel cannot be faulted for electing not to make that motion. See, State v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692, 698 (1966). We find that we must once again repeat that the evidence presented by the State was sufficient to sustain the jury's conviction of defendant for the offense charged.

  3. State ex Rel. Thunstrom v. Tahash

    167 N.W.2d 139 (Minn. 1969)   Cited 7 times
    Holding denial of allocution not prejudicial when a PSI was available, defense counsel spoke at sentencing, and defendant testified at hearing on motion to set aside verdict

    The materials discovered in petitioner's automobile during the course of the search made in his presence by police officers acting pursuant to a search warrant would have been sufficient corroboration under our statute. See State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692; State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393, 127 N.W.2d 534. 1d. The claim of petitioner that he was threatened with a Federal prosecution by Minneapolis police officers if he persisted in his plea of not guilty to the charge of burglary in the third degree does not have adequate support in the record.

  4. State v. Valstad

    282 Minn. 301 (Minn. 1969)   Cited 18 times
    Holding that "[c]anvas gloves to avoid leaving fingerprints" could be considered burglary tools

    We think it clear from the whole of the evidence in this case that the arrest did not occur when defendant was first detained by the officers but that the factual circumstances which developed shortly thereafter established probable cause for arrest without a warrant and that a legal arrest followed, authorizing the incidental search of the automobile. Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364, 84 S.Ct. 881, 11 L. ed. 2d 777; Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L. ed. 543, 39 A.L.R. 790; State v. Grunau, 273 Minn. 315, 141 N.W.2d 815; State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692; State v. Sorenson, 270 Minn. 186, 134 N.W.2d 115; State v. Harris, 265 Minn. 260, 121 N.W.2d 327, certiorari denied, 375 U.S. 867, 84 S.Ct. 141, 11 L. ed. 2d 94. 6. This court has said that the proof of intent to commit a crime in connection with proof of burglary must rest on a permissible inference from the facts proved.

  5. State v. Sutton

    152 N.W.2d 57 (Minn. 1967)   Cited 11 times

    See, State ex rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 547, 141 N.W.2d 3, 9. Sutton's voluntary statement to the police is therefore distinguishable and constitutionally admissible both because it was not itself an incriminating admission or confession, being instead intended as an exculpatory alibi, and because there is no claim, in any event, that he either requested or was denied counsel before making his statement. State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692; State v. Winge, 274 Minn. 571, 144 N.W.2d 704; State v. Housker, 273 Minn. 42, 139 N.W.2d 474. 2.

  6. State ex Rel. Law v. District Court

    276 Minn. 324 (Minn. 1967)   Cited 8 times

    See, §§ 645.16, 645.17. This court recognized in State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 194, 140 N.W.2d 692, 696, that "[i]n this age when many crimes are possible with the aid of automobiles" criminal apprehension procedures must be given a reasonable construction lest we "make a farce of the police protection to which all citizens are entitled." The statutory power to make an arrest without a warrant, § 629.34(3), may validate an arrest made pursuant to § 629.32 where the warrant is itself defective.

  7. State v. Carmichael

    145 N.W.2d 554 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 8 times
    In State v. Carmichael, 275 Minn. 148, 145 N.W.2d 554, and State v. Houge, 280 Minn. 372, 159 N.W.2d 265, this court made it clear that the weight and credibility of disputed evidence were for the jury.

    Since they were made during the course of ordinary police investigative processes prior to the date of Miranda v. Arizona, supra, and were received without objection as to their voluntariness, it would follow that there was no error in the reception of testimony with respect thereto. State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692. 5. Defendant claims that he was held for an unreasonable length of time before appointment of counsel and before being taken before a magistrate in compliance with Minn. St. 629.14. While this may be true, such factors would not deprive the court of jurisdiction of his person or the subject matter of the case.

  8. State v. Winge

    274 Minn. 571 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 3 times

    State v. Taylor, 270 Minn. 333, 337, 133 N.W.2d 828, 831; State ex rel. Anderson v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 499, 142 N.W.2d 94. State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 194, 140 N.W.2d 692, 697; State ex rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 548, 141 N.W.2d 3, 10. State v. Housker, 273 Minn. 42, 43, 139 N.W.2d 474, 475.

  9. State ex Rel. Geiselhart v. Tahash

    144 N.W.2d 354 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 9 times
    In State ex rel. Geiselhart v. Tahash, 274 Minn. 464, 144 N.W.2d 354, decided a short time after Krahn, we held that the law did not require that the defendant be asked if he had anything to say, nor did it require a presentence investigation where before sentence was imposed an extensive examination of defendant was made.

    In any event, we adhere to the rule that there is no violation of due process in the absence of prejudice. State v. Bosnich, 273 Minn. 553, 142 N.W.2d 63; State ex rel. Anderson v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 499, 142 N.W.2d 94; State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692. In State ex rel. Ballinger v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 177, 140 N.W.2d 53, the issues were very similar to those now before us.

  10. State v. Clifford

    273 Minn. 249 (Minn. 1966)   Cited 19 times
    Holding that knowledge of a suspect's felony record alone does not constitute probable cause for their arrest, but may be considered along with all the other circumstances

    State v. Sorenson, 270 Minn. 186, 199, 134 N.W.2d 115, 124; Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364, 366, 84 S. Ct. 881, 883, 11 L. ed. 2d 777, 780. State ex rel. Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187, 140 N.W.2d 692; State ex rel. Branchaud v. Hedman, 269 Minn. 375, 130 N.W.2d 628, certiorari dismissed, 381 U.S. 907, 85 S.Ct. 1456, 14 L.ed. 2d 289; State v. Harris, 265 Minn. 260, 269, 121 N.W.2d 327, 333, certiorari denied, 375 U.S. 867, 84 S.Ct. 141, 11 L. ed. 2d 94. Henry v. United States, 361 U.S. 98, 104, 80 S.Ct. 168, 172, 4 L. ed. 2d 134, 139; Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, 42, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 1634, 10 L. ed. 2d 726, 743.