On March 14, 2016, this court affirmed appellants' convictions. See State v. Philip Lee Carlson, A15-0190 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016), and State v. Virginia Marie Carlson, A15-0179 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn.
The Carlsons appealed their convictions, arguing that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions; (2) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct; (3) the state violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194 (1963); (4) the state failed to disclose exculpatory evidence to the grand jury; (5) the district court erred in ruling that certain documents could not be used at trial; (6) the district court erred in admitting certain evidence; (7) the district court erred in instructing the jury regarding accomplice liability; (8) they did not adequately waive their rights to testify; and (9) public policy required reversal. State v. Carlson, No. A15-0190, 2016 WL 952465, at *3-9 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016); State v. Carlson, No. A15-0179, 2016 WL 952453, at *3-10 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn.
The plea agreement provided that if Carlson succeeded in his appeal of file 27-CR-11-29604, he would be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea in the present case. Because we affirmed that conviction in State v. Carlson, No. A15-0190 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016), Carlson is not entitled to withdraw his plea on that basis.
We therefore address Philip Carlson's appeal separately. State v. Philip Carlson, No. A15-0190, slip op. (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016). DECISION