CASE LAW: Whether defendant’s challenge to the validity of the order for protection was not timely?
Defendant was convicted of violating an order for protection. He had encountered his former girlfriend at a Walmart. He appealed his conviction. On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court violated his right to due process by issuing the order. Defendant did not contest the validity of the order before he was convicted. The Minnesota Court of Appeals therefore held that his challenge was an ineffective collateral attack on the underlying order and declined to address the merits of his constitutional argument. Affirmed.
State v. Standifer, A20-0678, Hennepin County.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.