Ineligible person in possess of firearm

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Conviction reversed because circumstantial evidence insufficient    

Defendant was convicted of ineligible person in possession of a firearm, based upon circumstantial evidence.  He appealed arguing that the evidence was insufficient.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed, holding the circumstantial evidence insufficient on the grounds that there was a reasonable hypothesis inconsistent with guilt given that although DNA evidence may have established that defendant touched the gun at some point, it did not establish when he had contact with it, the firearm was not found in the bedroom where defendant appeared to be sleeping and storing his belongings, the firearms was not in plain sight; accordingly, the evidence did not show that he was consciously exercising dominion and control over the firearm on the date of the search.

State v. Smith, A20-0654, Hennepin County.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

By |2021-06-30T02:15:07+00:00June 30th, 2021|Victories/Case Law Updates|0 Comments

About the Author:

Leave A Comment