Title: State v. Hodgson
Citation: 204 N.W.2d 199
Docket Number: 42966
State: Minnesota
Issuer: Minnesota Supreme Court
Date: February 2, 1973

204 N.W.2d 199 (1973) STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Dr. Jane Elizabeth HODGSON, Appellant. No. 42966. Supreme Court of Minnesota. February 2, 1973. R. Paul Sharood and Henry H. Cowie, Jr., St. Paul, Roy Lucas, New York City, for appellant. Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, William B. Randall, County Atty., Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. County Atty., St. Paul, for respondent. Maun, Hazel, Green, Hayes, Simon &amp; Aretz and Louis Brenner and William J. Hassing, St. Paul, for Minn. Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. Deonne Parker, Lynn S. Castner, Minneapolis, for Minn. Civil Lib. Union; R. Michael Wetherbee, Minneapolis, of counsel. Heard and considered en banc. PER CURIAM. Defendant, Jane E. Hodgson, appeals from a conviction for performing an abortion in violation of Minn.St. 617.18. On the authority of Roe v. Wade, ___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147, decided January 22, 1973, and Doe v. Bolton, ___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 739, 35 L. Ed. 2d 201, decided January 22, 1973, we reverse. Defendant is a physician duly licensed by the State of Minnesota, specializing in obstetrics and gynecology. In March 1970, a patient then 3 or 4 weeks pregnant contracted rubella. Because Dr. Hodgson was of the opinion there was a substantial likelihood the patient's unborn child would suffer a severe deformity as a result of the rubella, she and other physicians sought a Federal court injunction restraining the state from enforcing the abortion statute. Unsuccessful in that effort, Dr. Hodgson performed an abortion on the patient in Miller Hospital, St. Paul, on April 29, 1970. The operation took place during the first trimester of the patient's pregnancy. *200 Dr. Hodgson was subsequently indicted for violation of Minn.St. 617.18. She was tried and convicted by the court without a jury. On November 20, 1970, the court imposed a jail sentence of 30 days which was stayed and she was put on probation without supervision for a period of 1 year. Dr. Hodgson has challenged the constitutionality of § 617.18, in the trial court and in this court, citing as authority Roe v. Wade, 314 F. Supp. 1217 (N.D.Tex.1970), and Doe v. Bolton, 319 F. Supp. 1048 (N.D. Ga.1970). Four days after her case was argued, the appeals in the two cases cited were heard by the United States Supreme Court. They were decided on January 22, 1973, and govern the disposition of the matter here before us. Minn.St. 617.18 provides as follows: That statute is described by the Supreme Court of the United States as similar to the Texas statute which it held unconstitutional in Roe v. Wade, supra.[1] In so far as it is applicable, the Texas abortion statute provides as follows: Vernon's Ann.Tex.Pen.Code art. 1191 (1961). Tex.Pen.Code art. 1196 (1961). In neither statute is an abortion authorized except to preserve the life of the mother or the child. In Roe v. Wade, supra, the plaintiff was a pregnant unmarried woman who sought a declaratory judgment and injunction restraining the district attorney from enforcing the Texas abortion statutes. The lower court held the statutes to be in violation of the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and "void on their face." ___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147. However, the court denied injunctive relief. Appeals and cross-appeals were thereupon taken to the United States Supreme Court. With exceptions not here relevant, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the district court, concluding that Article 1196 of the Texas Penal Code was unconstitutional and that the remainder of the statute "as a unit, must fall." ___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147. The court based its decision on a violation of the patient's right of privacy found in the Fourteenth Amendment. By way of summary, the Supreme Court concluded its decision with the following directive (___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 732, 35 L. Ed.2d 147): The Georgia statute, held unconstitutional in Doe v. Bolton, supra, permitted an abortion only if one of the following conditions existed: In that proceeding, the plaintiff was a pregnant married woman who, together with various physicians, clergymen, and others sought a declaratory judgment that the Georgia abortion statutes were unconstitutional in their entirety. In affirming that part of the district court's decision which held invalid the provisions described above, the Supreme Court stated (___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 747, 35 L.Ed.2d 201): *202 In Roe v. Wade, supra, the court held that during the first trimester "the attending physician, in consultation with his patient, is free to determine, without regulation by the State, that in his medical judgment the patient's pregnancy should be terminated. If that decision is reached, the judgment may be effectuated by an abortion free of interference by the State." ___ U.S. ___, 93 S. Ct. 732, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147. In the instant case, the facts bring Dr. Hodgson squarely within the constitutional protection enunciated in Roe v. Wade, supra. The abortion she performed occurred within the first trimester of pregnancy following consultation with her patient. At that point the abortion was a medical decision based on the doctor's professional judgment. The doctor assumed a responsibility which was properly vested in her at a time, and under circumstances, which precludes the state from claiming any compelling interest in interfering with the operation. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is reversed. Reversed. [1] Roe v. Wade, ___ U.S. ___, note 2, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973).