Case Title: State v. Fields

Citation: 237 N.W.2d 634

Docket Number: 

State: minnesota

Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Date: 1976-01-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
237 N.W.2d 634 (1976) STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Willie F. FIELDS, Appellant. No. 45423. Supreme Court of Minnesota. January 9, 1976. C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, Mark W. Peterson, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant. Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., William B. Randall, County Atty., Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. County Atty., St. Paul, for respondent. Considered and decided by the court without oral argument. PER CURIAM. Defendant was found guilty by a district court jury of a charge of burglary, Minn.St. 609.58, subd. 2(1)(a), and sentenced by the trial court to a maximum of 20 years' imprisonment, this term to run consecutively to terms for prior convictions. On this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law and that the prosecutor's closing argument was prejudicially improper. There is no merit to the first issue since he was caught inside the building being burglarized. As to the second issue, it appears that the prosecutor erred in commenting on defendant's failure to call witnesses to corroborate his testimony. We have clearly disapproved of any argument by the prosecutor concerning the failure of a defendant to produce witnesses. We said in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (1974): See also, State v. Meadows, Minn., 226 N.W.2d 303 (1975). *635 In discussing the testimony of defendant, the prosecutor stated: This strong language makes it difficult to affirm and we do so only because the evidence is so strong that we cannot conclude that the misconduct played a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict. In another factual setting such remarks might well be reversible error. Affirmed.