Court Opinion

ID: 9727760
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:49:46.070554+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:42.545989
License: Public Domain

Boslaugh, J.,
dissenting.
I concur in the dissent of Judge Colwell.
In my opinion the decision in this case cannot be reconciled with our recent decisions in State v. Guy, ante p. 610, 419 N.W.2d 152 (1988), decided February 12, 1988, and State v. Watkins, ante p. 677, 419 N.W.2d 660 (1988), decided today. The evidence of guilt in this case is much stronger and the objectionable evidence much less prejudicial than in the Guy and Watkins cases.
It is also a matter of some interest that after Lenz had been arrested and given the Miranda warnings, he gave the police a statement denying any involvement in the robbery.
After conviction, Lenz wrote out a complete confession in his own handwriting, which is a part of the presentence report.