State v. Hentges, Minn.S.Ct., 4/2/2014. Mr. Hentges appealed his conviction for felony failure to pay child support. While the appeal was pending the trial court scheduled a hearing on an alleged probation violation. Mr. Hentges failed to appear at the hearing so the state moved to dismiss the appeal under something called the “fugitive-dismissal rule.” The court of appeals said, no so the state asked the supreme court. Justice Stras, for six members of the court – Justice Wright taking no part – adopted this rule and threw out the appeal. Justice Page agreed with adopting the rule but he thought that because the use of the rule is discretionary he would have sent the case back to the court of appeals.
Justice Stras, ah la Justice Scalia, takes us through a history of the development of this rule. He then informs us that only five states have declined to adopt it: Hawaii, Michigan, South Dakota, Vermont, and Minnesota. Only Louisiana and New Mexico have rejected it. In signing Minnesota up with the adopters of the rule Justice Stras relies on two rationales: the appellate court’s opinion isn’t enforceable while the guy is on the lamb; and, doing a runner amounts to a waiver or forfeiture of the right of appeal.
No comments:
Post a Comment